Perish the thought! Surely no one would behave this way towards someone who comes forward about a sexual assault? reads posts in this very thread Oh, right…
Yes. That’s why when we hear a survivor accused of subjecting someone to death threats because they chose to tell their story, it does not seem innocuous.
It seems like just more of the same old misogynist crap we’ve heard all our lives.
You know, if it quacks like a misogynistic duck, it just might be a misogynistic duck.
Well, yes. I was trying to distinguish between those being negative internal narratives vs that quicksilver was endorsing those as valid reasons.
Understood and agreed.
That’s certainly how I took it: that Quicksilver was imagining her thinking that.
Thank you. I was starting to think I’d lost what little I have of my communication skills.
I have not seen that claim made by any poster in this thread.
What has occurred is that you have made statements that posters have decried as misogynistic. They specifically cite these statements, and, in one form or another, point out why they believe the statement to be misogynistic.
These posts cannot be dismissed as “not a discussion,” or “not on the merits.” You have stated that you do not see Hurricane Ditka’s statement as misogynistic. The statements you are making are ones that purportedly show that his post is not misogynistic. So pointing out that said argument does in fact contain misogyny is entirely relevant to the merits.
Or, in the case where you said that you do not count women’s opinions more than men’s opinions, it’s relevant because that is elevating uninformed opinions to the same level as informed ones. Such is still on the merits, because properly weighing the opinions of what is misogyny is important in determining what is misogynistic.
There are a lot of arguments in this thread that you have not responded to, including the bulk of those made by women. I simply request that you respond to these people, rather than dismissing them.
But that’s the thing. Ford’s actions weren’t about swaying public opinion because they were not initially public. And then she only went public after the report was leaked, and people were trying to out her–and being outed would be more damaging than outing herself.
The narrative that she reported the rape specifically to sway public opinion against Kavanaugh is one that is held only by those who defend Kavanaugh. It is a way of making him into a victim.
Such a claim would be fine on its own, but Hurricane Ditka made his post from the Democratic point of view, decrying the Democrats for not having stood up against Ford and her allies for performing an act that resulted in death threats towards Kavanaugh’s family.
Because they did not do so, they clearly do not care if someone performs a political act that results in death threats. This is an argument that only makes sense if you think Ford, even if she was sexually assaulted, should have kept her mouth shut.
And that is what I argue is misogynist. Throw in the poster’s history, and I don’t think that misogyny was accidental.
But even accidental misogyny deserves at least a Note.
She did not report a rape. There is no claim, by her or by any senators, that Kavanaugh raped her. Not only are you trying to repeat her provably false claim, you can’t even do that right.
…do you understand what is meant by the word “narrative” in the context of the post that you snipped?
So not too long ago Games developer and longtime Gamergate target Zoe Quinn came forward and accused one of the devs of Night In The Woods of sexual assault. This was corroborated by several others, and the dev team dropped him from their company. Then he killed himself. In response to this, a group of people (consisting mostly of misogynistic Gamergate trolls) called Quinn a murderer. It was pretty obvious to anyone with a brain that this accusation was fundamentally unfair, and that those smearing Quinn were assholes who didn’t care about the developer in question, or the express wishes of his family, or suicide, as they were quite eager to encourage Quinn to kill herself.
I bring this up because that same rhetorical sleight of hand - blaming a rape victim for the consequences her rapist faces - is exactly what we’re looking at here. Except that in this case, it’s not “driven from his company and killed himself” but rather “faced a few threats from nutters on the internet on his way to a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court”, which kind of makes it even worse.
Anyone surprised that HD said something stupid, dishonest, and deeply sexist (something that immediately sidetracked the conversation because of how deeply shitty and offensive it is) must be new here. It’s the only noteworthy thing about him.
Anyone remember, like, a month ago, after pages of threadshitting and trolling, Bone warned HD and told him he was on thin ice? I swear this is a thing that happened at one point. What happened to that? Hey Bone, maybe when every woman who looks at it says, “wow, what a fucked-up, misogynistic thing to say”, you should listen.
A political move such as concern that a man who attempted sexual assault could do incredible amounts of harm to women in general when placed on the highest court in the country? A man with a documented history of hostility toward Roe v.Wade?
Those are two questions. Not an answer.
When you’re dealing with the fate of half the nation’s welfare, politics are inevitable.
I agree. I’m in the “yes, it was at least a little political” camp. Plus, even if it was “a little political”, I’m okay with that.
Bone, I don’t think anyone is saying you’re a misogynist. Certainly I’m not. But I think what people are saying is that you may be having trouble seeing misogyny in others, and in the statements of others (which aren’t the same thing; a person who’s not misogynous can say something that reads that way), because your experience is different from the experience of those who do see it; and that those who do see it have more actual experience on the subject, and therefore you should be paying more attention than you are to such opinions.
When you say you don’t even see an actual argument being made – to me that’s another indication that your experience may have you in blinders. That’s not, repeat not, an accusation of evil doing, or or stupidity, or even of willful ignorance. We’ve all got blinders on about some things in the world, just about different ones. Seeing the blocks inside one’s own head is one of the hardest things in this world to do, and nobody’s always successful about it – one doesn’t see them until one sees them, that’s just the nature of the way that minds work.
No, she didn’t go public to start with; she wasn’t directly appealing to the public. She was trying to appeal to the Senate by talking to a Senator, and hoped – probably naively – that this could be done without her name being attached to her information. So I probably did phrase that badly. But in appealing to the Senate she was still trying to affect a political process; by definition, trying to affect a political process is political. ETA: however, criticizing such things for being political is unreasonable; and criticizing someone for coming forward only when it appears that information may affect the politics of the country as a whole, when one didn’t come forward when it appeared that it would at most affect one’s own immediate circle and probably wouldn’t have done that, is IMO unreasonable.
At least two women posters decided they were leaving the board, due to board policies/practices on misogyny and related issues, in this thread: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=885750
I assume the staff is concerned about this. What is being done, or discussed? Is there a plan to fix this?
They don’t give a shit and they’re not going to do a goddamned thing. Happy to be able to clear that up for you.
The Dope is a safe space for old men.
That doesn’t deserve a response.