Comments on: Just Goes To Show, You Can’t Win For Losing

By: Raznor

Raznor — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 18:20:14 +0000

By the way, AW left a post at my blog to defend himself. I responded to it here if anyone's interested. Short version - AW may have had best intentions, but was still wrong.

By: zuzu

zuzu — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 17:40:48 +0000

I can see his email address. Or, I should say, his email addresses, since he used several, as well as several different pseuds.

By: Rhiannon

Rhiannon — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 17:29:10 +0000

No where in the post did AW say if they were male or female. So I’d just like to know how everyone else seems to just “know” it.

By: zuzu

zuzu — Sun, 30 Jul 2006 03:12:08 +0000

CoRev, talk about an example of indirect bullying.

Spit it out: who are you calling a mean girl, and who is the bully you’re referencing?

Boys are supposed to be so atomic-wedgie direct, after all.

By: CoRev

CoRev — Sun, 30 Jul 2006 02:56:09 +0000

Sheesh! Talk about the “Mean Girl” syndrome.

This is an excerpt from “Facing the Schoolyard Bully”

Girls tend to bully indirectly, by isolating their victims or assaulting them through teasing and verbal backstabbing. …Girls, on the other hand, value relationships, so girl bullies target relationships by spreading rumors, for example, to socially isolate the victim. In other words, they get ‘em where it hurts.

By: Raznor

Raznor — Sat, 29 Jul 2006 23:24:20 +0000

weekly rob – I’ve learned not to argue with ginmar. The thing is, she has an in-your-face writing style that puts people off. But I’ve found that when I’m uncomfortable with her comments, but then I stand back and think about what she said, by hell she’s right almost all the time, and the fact that I was uncomfortable about how she said it beats the point home even further. What you’re reacting to is her style, not her content. So I’d suggest take a step back, breathe, reread this thread and you’ll realize ginmar is right again.

the thing is, when aw says “your community is shit” he’s not implying that he’s lucky and lives in a good community and expressing sympathy to poor ginmar for happening to live in a shitty community, he’s giving a snarky condescending comment that ginmar doesn’t know what she’s talking about. And it requires at best a willful ignorance and blinding by his male privelege. AW is a man coming into a feminist space. He has to do the work to attempt to understand the perspective of the women here, not the other way around. And if he refuses, then what can he possibly add to the conversation?

By: kate

kate — Sat, 29 Jul 2006 21:45:53 +0000

Thanks Rob for getting the hell off the thread, now that you’ve completely derailed it, but hell, its just women’s lives we’re talking about.

No big deal.

By: ginmar

ginmar — Sat, 29 Jul 2006 18:57:12 +0000

Wow, no pressure there, invoking Stalin. Instead, we’re talking about a pattern of behavior we’ve seen over and over again that we’re tired with. Evidently the commenter is the banned troll from yesterday, as well, trying to evade his ban. We have seen this kind of thing over and over and over and I don’t think I”m alone in wanting to cut this shit off at the knees when it starts because it follows such a predictable pattern. It’s insulting to feminists to have to deal with the same old slurs and tactics and denials over and over again, and we don’t waste time nailing the assholes that do it. I know I’m not alone in this. So?

By: weeklyrob

weeklyrob — Sat, 29 Jul 2006 16:49:54 +0000

All I did was try to point out that, to use your expression, I read the comment in question differently from you.

Since then, I’ve been more or less defending myself by explaining what I wasn’t saying, didn’t say, etc.

I can see the futility of that, as you apparently assume I’m lying about justification, and blind about everything else.

Privilege was first brought up when ginmar incorrectly said that I gave AW slack while attacking her. I never did either. It’s not an illustration of privilege that I read the one comment differently from how you read it.

If someone says that Stalin kicked puppies, I should be able to say that he didn’t without everyone assuming that I love Stalin and that I claim that he never did anything wrong and that, since I never suffered the gulag, I can’t see what happened there.

You’ll be happy to know that I’m off the thread. I’ll read your comments, of course, but I won’t respond.

By: zuzu

zuzu — Sat, 29 Jul 2006 16:26:57 +0000

For someone who doesn’t care, you’ve sure left a lot of comments about it.

I read the comment very differently than you did, in context. In any event, AW essentially came in here, waved his dick around, told us that we didn’t know reality, insulted the community and the regular commenters, used multiple pseuds, and was generally annoying. Now you’re nitpicking about what made him a troll. You’re not seeing the privilege in a guy coming into a feminist forum and making those sorts of comments, and that’s what Claudia’s pointing out to you. Your privilege is that it’s not you he’s trying to shut up, so you don’t have to see that that’s what he was doing. Your multiple comments on this — as well as your insistence that I don’t have to justify the banning, even as you continue to make arguments that ask for a justification — show that you don’t see that he was trying to shut us up.