Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[pmcd9]

I'm not sure I'm better off knowing there was a 'loose meat asshole' incident.

[Victoria Waterfield]

I'm not sure I'm better off knowing there was a 'loose meat asshole' incident.

Damn it Paul the hyphen Ash employed in that phrase was vital

[pmcd9]

Damn it Paul the hyphen Ash employed in that phrase was vital

Damn it! I noticed the hyphen after I had hit the post button. I know, I should have fixed it, but I thought I could let it slide this once - it was late. I forgot who I was talking to. I've been corrupted by Facebook. I just saw a friend replay "your welcome" on 4 consecutive post.

Can you find it in your heart to forgive me?

[Carlos del Vaca]

Bewildering: the same person posting an anti-bullying thing, and then a meme saying "If you support Hillary Clinton, you are a traitor to your country!", within 24 hours of each other.

[miles]

If you accept the Constitutional definition of treason, and if a traitor is a person who has committed treason, then no, supporters of Hillary Clinton are not traitors. Even if you broaden the definition, you're still way off. But if your defintion of a traitor is something you pulled out Glenn Beck's ass, then you might have a point.

Sometimes the only response is to bang your head against the wall.

[pmcd9]

A little fun went down on my Facebook page a few days ago. This started as a comment in response to me posting a photo of myself at the polls voting shirtless.

[pmcd9]

Here's another little Facebook battle I was involved in. This one is not as fun because I'm the bad guy, apparently. I'm still not sure if I'm a thoughtless dolt or these women are just a bunch of meanies. I'd like for you guys to help me to figure it out. Anyway, this took place over in the Politichos group and it started with a comment I made about this article.

[Carlos del Vaca]

From the first one, that's mostly the same crap over and over, but what I find particularly interesting is when Republican Alan posts a picture of a t-shirt that says "Skilled labor isn't cheap, cheap labor isn't skilled." (Which is something I largely agree with.) I wonder which party he thinks has done more to make sure labor stays cheap? (Well, I can guess what he THINKS, but that's probably different from how things really are. Though on the whole both parties have done their share.)

As for the second one, I'm sure your intentions are good, and as "verbal abuse" goes your comments were pretty mild. On the whole, though, telling a minority group (in this case women) what they should think about an article, no matter how justified you think they may be, is not a great idea.

[theinevitable]

I give up at this point. If anyone tries to engage me about who to vote for in the primaries I change the subject. Anyone I know who is going for Hillary is apparently going to find a way to think I'm being a dick if I disagree with them about it.

[pmcd9]

As for the second one, I'm sure your intentions are good, and as "verbal abuse" goes your comments were pretty mild. On the whole, though, telling a minority group (in this case women) what they should think about an article, no matter how justified you think they may be, is not a great idea.

Here's the deal, I don't think I did that. In fact, It seems to me that the exact opposite took place. I stated my opinion and was attacked for it. What I really want to know is, was I right about the article? Did it, or did it not strongly suggest that the circumstances of this election would be different if Bernie were a woman? I'm not particularly astute, perhaps I got it wrong. Everyone in that thread seems to think so, but they weren't interested in explaining why. They preferred to just throw insults at me instead.

[KeithHernandez]

I don't think Paul did anything wrong at all and I think voting for a woman because she is a woman is stupid.  If her and Bernie were equal I could see using it as a tie breaker, but they are not.

[Carlos del Vaca]

What I really want to know is, was I right about the article? Did it, or did it not strongly suggest that the circumstances of this election would be different if Bernie were a woman?

The article did strongly suggest that, yet. But I don't think that's the point of the article. The point of the article is about the conflict between being a lifelong feminist activist and thinking you should be a Hillary supporter, but actually finding Bernie's positions better overall, though they come with a pile of Bernie Bros and their lousy attitudes towards women.

[Carlos del Vaca]

I will say that there can be a very thin line between "mansplaining" and "a man saying something to a woman." The former does happen and is no doubt obnoxious as crap to be on the receiving end of. OTOH, sometimes you're just a guy trying to have a conversation and suddenly you're sexist.

[theinevitable]

the recent "adding 'man-' to the front of things to make them gendered" thing is killing me. Only men take up extra space on public transit? Only men obnoxiously explain things? Give me a break.

Worse, the "mansplaining" thing, half the time, seems to mean "this guy disagreed with me, and tried to explain why." How awful! Someone disagreed with you and explained their reasoning? What horrific oppression!

[wombat]

Mansplaining is a very useful concept and I hope people aren't diluting it that way. It should definitely be reserved for cases like the other day when the Technical Staff was telling me how to train the dog.

On the other hand, something I have learned working as a writer is that the thing about communication is that the customer is always right. If the person you are talking to is not hearing your message the way you intended them to, you should always think again about how you are delivering the message.  Maybe that person is so thick that there is no way to get through to them, and you have to recognize when to stop beating your head against a wall. But it's also possible that you need to basically revise and resubmit.