Can I just ask you a question? Why do you and Chimera and whoever else think that Skald has pointedly avoided every single post referencing this behavior of his? Can you come up with a better response than “choosing not to dignify with a response”?
I don’t have an opinion on this. Y’all have got these super-strong opinions that you sit around and reinforce with one another, but I don’t have strong opinions on the subject. I saw the thread that folks find Skald annoying, was curious about why, and stepped into some serious crazytown thinking.
Why does Skald ignore you? Possibly because he’s a wiser dude than I am. Possibly because he hasn’t noticed. I don’t know, and don’t really care.
Now or in the past?
Frankly, there are all too often times where the best defense is no defense. One isn’t required to justify or explain all of one’s actions to people who set themselves up as authorities to whom you must answer.
Or in much simpler terms;
Who the fuck are you that anyone should have to justify themselves to you? You’re just some rando on a message board with a bug up his ass.
You’re quite the wizard Harry. You conjured up so much irony in that paragraph, you made the Sun blink.
Just to be clear, I don’t really have a strong one either. I don’t read or participate in most of Skald’s hypotheticals as they tend to be long and twisty enough my poor attention span wanders. I found him to be a generally amiable enough poster in CS threads, if occasionally a bit bombastic and theatrical( which I guess irritated a few ). Otherwise seemed like an okay guy in my limited exposure.
But I used to think Louis C.K. seemed like a pretty okay guy as well, so what do I know. The description of his off-board behavior was a little gross and kinda surprised me. But my main reason to link to it was to give a little context as to why some folks might see a pattern, beyond just whatever he was posting.
And women in his stories women have no agency at all and are in his stories either to be hot and have bad things done to them by men, or be hot and rescued from bad things by men, and that isn’t reductive and creepy at all.
isn’t that just 90 percent of womens literature of the cheap paperback variety ? just sayin …….
I don’t reinforce my opinions with anyone. Just because I post on Giraffe boards doesn’t mean I run my opinions past them before I post. I say what’s on my mind. Some people have agreed with me. Has nothing to do with me being a regular poster in (let’s just say what we’re all thinking) the ongoing snark thread over there. My posting in that particular thread is 80% goofing off and 20% actual snark.
I mean, why else do you think I’m willing to voice my opinions about a longtime, well-liked Doper? You think I want to climb that particular mountain? The “mean girls” comment would make a lot more sense if regular targets in the snark thread were constantly being followed around and being accused of unjust, completely false things. That’s not happening, right? So, the logic doesn’t quite follow there.
It happened to me.
I don’t always read or even vote in the hypotheticals, because it gets a little wearing for the women to almost always basically be sexy props- when the characters aren’t raped or tortured. I mean, hurrah for the superhero to save the damsel! But damn- there’s a whole lot of feminine victimhood going on.
The difference is consent. If you go shopping for books in that particular genre and buy them or check them out of the library, you are consenting to the content and you know what you’re getting into. Nobody here is paying to read, and it’s just common courtesy to either be aware that your particular idee fixe is outside the mainstream and would, IRL, require consent and a safe word and therefore is not generally a good choice for general conversation with an unknown audience or to clearly label your rape threads as rape threads so those who prefer to avoid such material know enough to pass it right on by. Endlessly shoehorning your particular spankbank into every thread you start and giving them innocuous titles means a whole lot of people end up feeling like they stepped in dogshit when they thought they were in a nice clean room. After a while of this, you DO learn not to assume no dogshit, but it rankles and eventually you might want to address the St Bernard in the room which is permanently affixed to its owner by a leash and ask that person why he allows his fucking dog to shit everywhere. Metaphorically speaking.
Which hypothetical was it?
Can you elaborate? What are you saying happened to you?
I have been followed around and cursed and been called names. General harassment in my book. I don’t start trouble. Not my way. I’ve been lied about.
My whole problem with this is; you don’t have to read his threads. It’s not mandantory. You all seem to know his story lines, so avoid them. I read one of his hypotheticals and I probably won’t read anymore. I don’t buy horror books, I don’t read comics, I don’t watch sitcoms. You know why? I don’t like them. Easy peasy.
expacto -
Your argument would be stronger if you had posted about something other than your objections to Shag or Skald over the past 2 months.
When was your last post on another subject? It seems to be on April 3rd of this year, over a month ago.
Admittedly, you participated in the “So who has been injured by a texter?” thread. But jeez, I see your 25 most recent posts are on the subject of your obsession (what Skald shouldn’t post on), 1 post on capers, and 5 posts on texting.
Then we’re back to a bunch of posts about Shag. Like 62. And a few scattered posts about the Giraffe board, Nude Sexy Gorgon Artwork, and whether its a problem being an Online Dating Addict. That puts us through November 2017.
Look, it’s not like nobody agrees with you. While I see a few people participating in this thread for sport, a lot seem genuinely skeeved. Which is puzzling as most of the Skald threads seem PG-13 to me, and absolutely none are pornographic - neither of the soft or hard variety. I perceive substantive content behind his hypotheticals, albeit of a very different type than was ably outlined by Derleth.
Don’t believe me? Consider this. There are crowds of male posters here that aren’t reluctant to yuck it up whenever female breasts are mentioned. Cite: https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=690178&highlight=sexuality
I don’t see those sorts of responses in Skald threads. I see interesting discussion (though not sufficiently interesting for me to jump in that often). Admittedly, I might be wrong on this point, as I haven’t viewed that many threads of his.
Post 14 in the linked thread negated my last point. Oh well. :smack:
ETA: Sort of. The Skald thread wasn’t actually a hypothetical. And most of the responses weren’t salacious.
So, you’re saying you don’t like cheese? That’s a little weird because I know several lactose intolerant people who still love cheese even though they don’t eat it. Hell, for lunch yesterday I melted some cheddar and spicy jack on some nachos that already had nacho cheese sauce on them.
Hell no! I loves my cheese.
You’re asking people on the internet to exercise common sense and self restraint?