(Ganked from here)
(And also, this is an excellent take on the whole situation.)
(The title is a sarcastic reference to this comment to Jesus General’s post in which he writes a letter to Brittney’s employer. I’m curious as to why he penned such a glowing review of Brittney as a person, a writer, and a blogger, since he seems so outraged by her decision to post Smantix’ obituary and her choice of headline. The post that started the whole thing is here)
Brittney, Brittney, Brittney:
What are we going to do with you kitten?
You make a little faux pas (well, actually I think you’re in the shit up to your neck) and then attempt to lay the blame for people’s reaction on their failure to get the “subtelty” of your headline.
You say you don’t agree with the post and yet you have not said why you didn’t have some comment appended to it. Apparently you feel that the reader of the blog (who may or may not have been to the blog before) should devine your intent. A number of folks who have written comments in support of you have stated as much as well.
If you go to the Jesus’ General blog you will find a note, admittedly on the sidebar that states that the blog is “political satire”, not so with your website.
It is apparent that you have no intention of taking responsibility for making, at least, a misjudgement in running the piece in question.
It seems more likely that you are in fact, “manufacturing outrage” yourself.
I do hope Steve’s family are unaware of your indefensible lack of journalistic ethics. I also hope that if they become aware of them you have the decency to apologize to them.
democommie
You see, dollface, all this could have been avoided with a little sidebar notifying unwary visitors that your blog sometimes employs sarcasm. You know, like the one we have on Feministe. We don’t think our readers should expect to encounter tongue-in-cheek internal context on a blog. Ours is right up front, under the notice that no small children of either sex were riddled with bullets during the construction of our header, and the bright orange WARNING: ZUZU EATS BABIES. Otherwise, we’d run the risk of our audience taking posts like this one and this one and this one and the one gourmandizing about shrink-wrapped Starbucks cookies at face value, and then stupid people who don’t know us might get offended, and we can’t have that. You were careless, you adorable little snatchy wee bit of a girlie thing, you, so Daddy has to take off his belt and go all Wildmon on your ass–I mean, protect the dignity of Steve Gilliard and the feelings of his near and dear.
I think that there are arguments to be made against spreading Smantix’ bile, and even in favor of suspending the neutral breadth of a link-round-up-style blog in cases like his. I think that sarcasm sometimes goes awry, and that extra care should be taken when dealing with someone so well-loved. I do not think, however, that it makes sense to demonize Brittney for making an objectionable choice. I do not think it makes sense to pretend that sarcasm must be carefully delineated for the ignorant. I do not think it makes sense to respond to late-breaking context by escalating the original disproportionate response. I do not think that it’s fair to pretend that link-round-up-style blogs are uncommon. I think that attempting to bring down some kind of real-word smake or even making threats to that effect is reprehensible–and that it’s disgusting to pretend there’s some professional or journalistic interest in fucking this young woman over. And I think that if some of your commenters seem to be calling Brit a dumb cooze, you might want to take a step back and look at exactly what the subtext is here.
In other words, fuck you, JG, and a special fuck you to Mel Gibson up there. And I’m not being even a little bit facetious.
I clicked through to Brittney’s post, and I really don’t see where it can be characterized as a “link-round-up-style” post. It’s simply “Smantix says,” without context or comment. And even if the blog is meant to cover what the Nashville blogs are talking about, Brittney has an obligation, as a blogger for a NEWS PROGRAM, to perhaps consider the implications of a quote like that about a recently-dead person and how it’s going to reflect on you and your employer.
But I could just be sensitive because in a couple of hours, I’m heading up to Harlem to pay my respects. It’s a good thing Steve’s family doesn’t read blogs.
And I gave up babies. Too fatty.
I truly don’t think “Schooling the left” is an appropriate “link roundup” title for reprinting without comment the filth she reprinted.
if i wasn’t at work, i’d be headdesking vigorously.
but since i don’t own the cheap laminate “wood” in front of me, i’m afraid to break it.
jg might be demonstrating the danger of taking one’s satire to seriously. i mean, it’s fun to play dress up and pretend to be an asshat…but you don’t wanna be the guy who won’t take the costume off when the play is over.
“Zuzu eats babies”
So our beloved Zuzu is really Celine Dion? Oh my… :-)
I’m not sure how to respond to this, but the folks at JG’s keep trying to give Gilbert to me. (One guy emphatically wants me to take her.)
So Jesus General IS responsible for all comments on his blog? Just like Twisty Faster is responsible for all the comments on her blog? And you are responsible for all the comments on your blog?
It’s more of a link-round-up blog, one with a leftist slant. Brittney seems (seemed, since she’s resigned) to consider herself obligated to cover what most people are saying, but not to refrain from adding her own progressive views. She posted other link round-ups, including this one in reference to Gilliard’s death–it seems like Smantix didn’t get into it for a reason.
Actually, it was “Teaching libs a lesson.”
My take on it goes something like this:
Say Jessica Valenti passed away and some rightwing asshole posted a nasty obit. Then Amanda linked to it with a title like, “Showing feminists who’s boss.” Then a few people who aren’t well-acquainted with Amanda took the post at face value and threw a fit. Then other people explained who Amanda was in order to put the post in proper context. Then the first group of people responded that Amanda should not have used sarcasm without clearly labeling it first and it was inappropriate, period, for her to link to the writings of a right-wing asshole and how dare she and now let’s try to get her fired.
At that point, I would stop giving these people the benefit of the doubt.
Nope! I’m saying that it might make him want to rethink his own attitude towards Brittney.
We’ve missed you! Where’ve you been?
And re: Twisty, I do think she needs to exercise a little more responsibility, but that’s another discussion.
I dunno, piny. I’m not buying it. The whole defense seems to be that visitors to the blog drawn by one post should have taken the time to figure out from reading the entire blog and casting runes and pawing through entrails what Brittney was all about.
And in your Jessica analogy, Amanda knows Jessica. Brittney didn’t know Steve. And the people who *do* know Steve are the ones who are upset.
I think she got unfairly piled on, but her excuses were exceedingly lame, particularly given that they were not coupled with a clarification, update or simple title change that would have conveyed the idea that she was trying to slam Smantix with the post and not Steve.
And for fuck’s sake, is it really so unexpected that people who see that a news outlet’s blog is apparently republishing with approval a vile attack on a man who just passed away way before his time might be a little, I dunno, *upset* at such republication? And that they might *continue* to be upset when the blogger refuses to clarify and her defenders lash out at the people complaining for not having the secret decoder rings?
I don’t think they would have needed to read “the entire blog,” for one thing, let alone cast runes and paw through entrails. A quick perusal of the front page would have been enough. Her political stance in general is not obscure at all–it’s about as difficult to see as Amanda’s feminism. I do think they were obligated to do a quick check before running with it, and I doubt that they did. For another, it’s not that I’m castigating JG just for making a mistake. I’m castigating him for making a mistake and then continuing to complain that he didn’t know enough to keep from making it in the first place. First it was, “How dare you?!” and now it’s, “How dare you fail to make it even more obvious that this wasn’t what you were doing?!” His initial reflexive reaction is understandable, but his attempt to blame Brit for all of this is not.
And in your Jessica analogy, Amanda knows Jessica. Brittney didn’t know Steve. And the people who *do* know Steve are the ones who are upset.
I think piny’s analogy works even if Amanda and Jessica don’t know each other. Bloggers are public people with known reputations, and if Amanda were someone who reads feminists blogs but doesn’t know Jessica, I think the title still works. I mean, were I to title a post “That’ll teach Gloria Steinem,” I think people would get the point irrespective of my (non-existent) relationship with her.
I think this is related to the “I didn’t mean to be racist,” thing. The blogger didn’t mean to offend? Too late.
(If you really did miss WTF, then I have to clarify, I just chose “WTF” on the spur of the moment, and I didn’t mean to steal someone else’s “handle.)
Piny, you can’t tell she is a liberal from a cursory glance of the blog (go to page 4 of the blog as it stands now to see what the page around the hideous screed about SteveG looked like). It reads like a bland cityblog: a tabby needs a home, you shouldn’t let your dog get fat, is primary election coverage starting too soon?, a “cute baby alert,” something on the kid who killed the giant pig — those are the posts surrounding the excerpt that suggests that Steve died from — you know I won’t even type it.
I think there is plenty of blame to go around. JG jumped in perhaps without doing the proper due diligence before he got started, but on the other hand, Brittney could have made it go away just by posting a clarification. Also, she should have taken into account that with a relatively big name in Left Blogistan like his, that outside readers would find that post through google, and take it exactly the same way JG did. That, plus it was a paid gig representing a news organization. If it was some unknown private blogger representing noone but themself, I imagine the reaction would have been very different.
I am still wondering why he piled on brittney when it was written by another blog completely. He called it hers, and said nothing about the moron who actually wrote it in the first place.
And when I read the title, it looked like pure snark to me. But possibly I’m not close enough to have it affect me the same way. Maybe jg should have considered that he was too close to it and should have paused before running with it.
Seems to me that the Nashville blog’s political bent is irrelevant. The passage quoted was incendiary even by blog standards. To post something like that and let it stand without comment reflects incredibly poor judgment. Is it a firing/resigning offense? In many big media outlets, yes, it would be.
If JG erred, it was a reasonable error.
I just want to point out that the sixth comment on the post was Brittney explaining “I don’t agree with the piece, in fact, I find it abhorrent,” so it’s a little disingenuous to say that Brittney could have made it all go away by posting a clarification. She did post a clarification almost as soon as the audience from Jesus’ General started showing up in droves. It wasn’t good enough for them.
I’m wondering why some people are taking this as an opportunity to sling unwarranted shit at Pandagon, Feministe, IBTP. To wit:
and this:
I don’t think that JG would endorse these attitudes (although I think he was wrong, very wrong in his handling of this situation), but when your supporters, which I assume are white male “liberals” feel emboldened enough to make these sorts of baseless attacks, it’s time to re-evaluate the culture that you’ve created around your blog.
Here’s part of the problem:
There are a lot of bloggers writing right now who were personal friends of Steve Gilliard’s. They met him in person, they corresponded with him, and they liked him on a personal level.
There are a lot more people who did NOT know him on a personal level. Like myself, they may feel some sadness at a man passing before his time, but we do not have the same level of grief as the people who knew him. Honestly, I stopped reading him a couple of years ago, so though I knew he was sick again, it was a shock to hear of his death.
And now we’re getting into, “But you can’t say that because it might hurt the feelings of his friends and family!” territory. I’m sure there are people out there who loved Jerry Falwell on a personal level as much as some bloggers loved Steve, and that some comments about his passing hurt as much as the ones that are out there. Does that mean that we now need to recant all of the mean things we said about Falwell?
I’m sorry, but I do think some people are overreacting out of their personal grief, and they will be a little embarrassed when they realize that they forced someone to resign over an insufficiently snarky headline.
Twisty might more comfortably argue that she’s not responsible for the commenters on her blog if she didn’t keep throwing them raw red meat. The folks whose names are up at the top of this blog call hateful commenters on their shit all the time; they make it obvious that they don’t support the bullshit. I don’t know about JG’s blog, so can’t say what his policy is like. So no, the comparison isn’t entirely apt.
I don’t regularly read JG, but from the few things I have read, isn’t he always doing a parody, a Colbert-style thing all the time, every post? That would make it difficult to see why someone wouldn’t see whatever he writes as parody. Am I wrong about this?
I didn’t understand at first, but I think I get it now.
The guy who wrote it originally? EEEESHHH. Scum of the earth. That’s way worse than what Amanda wrote about Jerry Falwell, and Falwell was actually a bad person.
Brittney? I think this could all have been fixed with the simple addition of two more words in the title. “Teaching the libs a lesson” could have become “Teaching the libs a lesson in compassion” and the sarcasm would have become painfully obvious. (You can insert your own variation.)
I mean, bloggers shouldn’t have to explain themselves all the time, but I think that in some situations, one should be very clear what s/he means.
That’s all I’m going to say. I find blog wars confusing.
I am still wondering why he piled on brittney when it was written by another blog completely. He called it hers, and said nothing about the moron who actually wrote it in the first place.
I picked that blog because it is owned by an ABC affiliate. The other blog is just some asshole with no readership. When given the choice between a media blog, especially one owned by the excreble ABC/Disney, and a dipshit who would enjoy the traffic. I’m going to for with the media blog every time.
As for “calling it hers,” perhaps you should actually read the post. I wrote: Now I know your blogger, Brittney, isn’t the author of those lines, but she deserves a lot of credit for republishing it without comment and thereby repackaging it as a WKRN 2 Nashville product.
A few other points I’d like to clear up, especially since MEK keeps getting them wrong elsewhere:
1. According to Gilbert, she wasn’t fired nor was she asked to resign. She chose to resign without pressure to do so.
2. I’m not taking any joy in this. I feel very badly that I was one of the factors that Gilbert considered when she made the decision to resign.
3. I have a very lassez faire attitude in regard to my comment threads. I seldom remove comments or ban people. That said, the kitten thing was out of line. Demmocommie has apologized for it.
4. Knowing what I know now, I wouldn’t have published the same post, but not knowing what I know now, I most certainly would.
5. I did look at other posts on that blog to determine if Gilbert was the main blogger or some kind of diarist. Nothing I saw suggested that she was a liberal.
6. As soon as I learned she was aiming for irony, i removed all contact info from the post. Later, I quoted Aunt B’s post about how important Gilbert is [was] to the liberal Nashville community–in other words, I didn’t call for her head after I learned that she quoted the asshole for ironic value.
7. I don’t think I made an unreasonable assumption when I first read the post.
8. Claims that this is about sexism are simply slander. No reasonable person could come to that concusion reading anything I’ve written about it.
Like I said. I feel very badly about this, but I can’t for the life of me, point to anything I did that requires an apology. It was a mistake certainly, but a very reasonable one to make. I did read other posts. If I had found anything that would have suggested that she posted that quote for it’s ironic value, I would have written a very different post.
Anyway, I’ve had my say. Carry on. Everybody needs a villian. I’ll gladly play that part for a blog as great as Feministe (I’ve always enjoyed it and will continue to do so–except for maybe this post). It’s certainly better than being reamed on Tiny Cat Pants.
I dunno, piny. I’m not buying it. The whole defense seems to be that visitors to the blog drawn by one post should have taken the time to figure out from reading the entire blog and casting runes and pawing through entrails what Brittney was all about.
I simply cannot believe that zuzu and I are, for once, in complete accord on an issue. I believe this calls for a celebration. A big one. Zuzu, do you prefer Shiraz or a nice Sauvignon Blanc? Or should we just go directly to champagne?
Well, this is a refreshing change from the feminist skirmishes I’ve been seeing lately. I mean, there’s women! And men! And lefties! And racists! And conservatives! And they’re all yelling at each other.
Hehehe.
Excuse the sarcasm. What I meant to say is that I’m very interested in seeing what kind of turns this war will take, now that it’s not just the wimmin-folk arguing amongst themselves. Let the guys get angry enough, and they’re going to do a lot worse than calling women “kitten.” And I’m talking about the lefties/progressives here.
Kevin, thanks, but don’t worry about “anon.” I wouldn’t exactly call him a liberal based on his prior work. I think rather he’s just an MRA piling on for the fun of it. “Woman down” = “blood in the water” to his sort.
I’m not a huge fan of the General’s right now, but even I can’t hold him accountable for some MRA-type crying over getting bunny-videoed at Pandagon. My admittedly limited impression of JG is that he would not be down with most of anon/Flathead’s views.
Although I could be wrong.
I like this comment of yours much better than others I’ve seen you make elsewhere about this previously, and yet–gah! Aunt B. only explained the problem to you about 67 times. Further, “quit demanding an apology from a woman who’s (a) already given you one and (b) has resigned her job at least in part because you suffered an itchy trigger finger while overcome by grief,” is not the same request as “apologize for what you did to the Nashville liberal blogging community.” I’ve heard the former request, not the latter.
Though, I don’t know, don’t want to speak for the Nashvillians or anything here, but those folks might appreciate something like the latter right now. Especially after they begged you to back off. How much clearer than “you’re hurting us” do you need it to be put?
If by “MEK” patriotboy means me, all I can say is, my comments are meant to register disappointment, not condemnation. I’m not out to defame someone I agree with most of the time … I only want him to be more considerate and careful than he was here. I acknowledged as much in one of my first comments, saying that if the misunderstanding was due to grief, well for fuck’s sake, who wouldn’t understand that?
Is the entrenchment, the perverse need to slander another to prove correctness, that bothers me. Be a human being, apologize for your (completely understandable, utterly forgivable) misunderstanding, and all’s well.
(Not that I matter in the grand scheme of things, mind you. I’m just a fool with fast fingers.)
Yes, I meant SEK. MEK is an American supported-Iranian Terrorist Group. Freudian slip? Maybe, I don’t know.
It was a misunderstanding, and the easiest thing would be for me to apologize and move on, but I don’t think I did anything wrong. It’s a tragedy. I feel very bad about it. I was mistaken, but it was a logical mistake to make. If I had cost her her job, it would be different. I didn’t.
I’m not the type of person who refuses to apologize when he’s wrong. Do a search on my blog for apology or sorry or some similar term. You’ll find three or four apologies. Look up Santorum and fetus. I think that will lead you to one.
Maybe I’ll change my mind in a few days after putting some disance between me and the controversy, but I don’t think so. I’ve put a lot of thought into it already.
Not saying that you should do our homework for us, but when and where did this happen? All I could find was this:
If you feel you made a mistake — even an understandable one — then what you need to do is APOLOGIZE. Otherwise, you sound like an ass as you run around saying, “Well, I feel really bad about making that mistake, but I have nothing to apologize for.” Yeah, you do. Otherwise, you wouldn’t still be feeling bad about it.
Nobody’s asking you to completely back down. But even a small, “Okay, I overreacted, sorry about that part of it,” would probably go a long way right now.
Yeah, about that:
This is the sum total of Brittney’s comments in that thread. I don’t see an acknowledgement that her post was poorly presented (in fact, I’m not even seeing her defend it as irony). She didn’t have to back down, either, but her handling of the situation — well before anyone from JG showed up — was pretty bad.
She republished a tasteless post and defended it because it was local, then got pissy when people pointed out that it was not just a local issue. And then disappeared, leaving the post exactly the way it was.
Comparisons to Jerry Falwell are inapt. For one thing, given the size of the Falwell media empire, it’s unlikely his friends or family would even see blog postings. Whereas Steve was a blogger, and this whole thing happened on a blog.
But I’m not going to say anything else. I’m too goddamned angry that this woman would post this and not have the decency to allow that she posted something less than clear and that her critics might just have a point. And I’m too goddamned angry about *this* post.
My condolences to everyone who knew Steve personally. God, he was 41. He wanted to stay in the world. I know how deeply his death is affecting you. I am sad, but I did not know him, and I admit that I am not experiencing the painful immediacy of grief, the way you are.
And I hate that this episode has gotten so caustic. The insufficiently characterized reprint was bad. The blowback was harsh and too personal. I didn’t see a whole lot of malice to start, except, of course, in the original vicious nastiness written by Smantix. (Feh.)
So, as an outsider, I see a passel of folks who I’d have considered allies snarling at each other. I frankly don’t care whether or not Smantix is enjoying it, but I do care that his agency is dismissed by characterizing him as an unknown blogger who nobody reads.
And I do care that my allies have to retreat from the arena, exhausted and bruised, because we’ve beaten each other up so very thoroughly. But sooner or later we’re going to have to stand up and and dust ourselves off, and mend our own delicate feelings, because the Smantixes still hate us, and the Constitution still needs protecting.
Forget the damn apologies. We need a cease-fire. This episode cannot be a deal-breaker. There’s too much at stake. We have things to do, and people to mourn.
I wish I was tougher, but I’m not, and in order to dust myself off, I have to walk away from this episode. Not from the people involved: you are allies. But I can’t do this aftermath, you know?
This entire thing is ridiculous.
Britney sought out the most racist thing she could find about Steve Gilliard’s death, printed it without comment, defended printing it without comment, and then resigned when she got criticism about it. Not because she was reprimanded for it. Not because she was fired for it. When she got criticism about it.
This is what happens when you do something blindingly stupid. You get criticism about it.
Patriotboy is not responsible for her pissy, self-sabotaging, passive-aggressive resignation. The person committing the pissy, self-sabotaging resignation is responsible for their own pissy, self-sabotaging resignation. Contra Tiny Cat Pants, Britney does not, by being a woman, somehow abdicate her responsibility not to give a racist pissing on a fresh grave her megaphone.
When you cause a teapot tempest, the appropriate thing to do is not to blow up and quit your job. The appropriate thing to do would be to fix the problem. Britney prints a clarification, patriotboy yanks his post, and it doesn’t escalate into an enormous cross-blog war that, frankly, no one but the people involved is interested in.
- ACS
Britney sought out the most racist thing she could find about Steve Gilliard’s death
The amount of misinformation floating around about the incident (when there’s plenty enough to refute most of it already on the ‘Net) is astounding.
Brittney “sought out” nothing. The post was on the Nashville regional blog aggregator and written by a Nashville area blogger, just like dozens/hundreds of other posts from other Nashville area bloggers that filtered through the aggregator on the same day, be they about cats needing homes, someone’s meme, the TN legislature vote on upping taxes on tobacco, and all manner of other stuff written by all types of Nashville area bloggers, including the vile post written by Smantix.
And it got feature linked on the NIT blog just like a few other dozen posts did of the recent days, and to her credit, Brittney did not post it alongside the feature links of posts respectfully eulogizing Steve’s passing.
Instead, she held it out as an example of something disgusting, which everyone that was supposed to understood. And those that didn’t understand, when they asked, it was explained to them. But that wasn’t good enough for some people.
But all that aside, to say Brittney “sought out” this post because she was looking for the most racist thing she could find about it is just plain misinformation. It was posted as about the 100 millionth example there’s been on NIT in two years (verifiable in the archives) as how disgusting Smantix’s post was, especially compared to the roundup of respectful eulogies she had posted previously, and was nothing more and nothing less.
It’s OK with me if you’re angry about it, but saying that she sought out the post because she was looking for the most racist thing she could find as if she had an agenda to do just that, rather than what has been a continual exposure over two years of just what an ass Smantix is, is a lie.
And if you didn’t mean it to sound like she had an agenda to do just that – then maybe you need to clarify a little bit better too just like folks like you think Brittney should have.
Wow.. Bit overboard, but I have to agree with ZuZu, I read the threads involved. I sorted and filed and I read JG alot.
She did it on purpose, and I think it’s sick. That’s the only answer I could think of after reading everything. She knew she was leaving and it was a perfect exit.
I–okay. It’s as though comment 37 never even happened. Or half the conversation about any of this, for that matter. Or the guy who wrote repulsive material in the first place. He definitely doesn’t exist. And the woman of whose motivations you are so, so certain, the woman who said of the repulsive material, “I think it’s abhorrent,” I’m not sure she was ever a real person.
If you all must have your witch to burn, could you consider going back to using Dawn Eden? There are limits to what can be chalked up to grief.
Pardon–comment 38. I see my favorite MRA made it out of moderation [waves]
I’m not trying to minimize Zuzu’s feelings in any way or invalidate them or anything like that, but I just want to point out that she and piny just managed to have a very heated disagreement about something that really angered and hurt Zuzu, if not piny as well…
…and neither of them was abusive to the other, and neither of them wrote a letter to the other’s employer suggesting she should be fired.
I’m just saying.
I’ve gone ’round and ’round on this one, and I think that while the pile-on got out of hand, Gilbert has nobody to blame but herself for people getting the wrong impression from her post.
A writer is responsible for his or her writing. And if a reader misinterperets a writer’s intent, that fault lies with the writer. A writer’s job is to communicate ideas through the written word. A failure of a reader to understand what is being communicated is a failure of the writer to properly communicate it.
That doesn’t excuse some of the reaction — people went overboard, clearly, and Gilbert’s failure to communicate didn’t rise to the level of a firing offense.
But if someone misinterperets what I write, that fault lies with me for not being clear. And while I understand piny’s point here, ultimately I have to disagree.
(As for the letter writing — that’s JG’s schtick. He’s been doing that for years. For good or for ill, Gilbert was writing for an ABC affiliate. And that’s a job that engenders public feedback in a way being a customer service rep doesn’t.)
I was on the other side (patronizing crypto-misogynistic tone aside), but this analogy actually convinced me. The General screwed up, and decided to dig himself a deeper hole rather than apologize or even just ignore his mistake.
Wait…. wait. What do you mean “all contact info”. Please clarify, because it’s not clear at all what info it was you posted. Anybody see the info he’s talking about.
(Mostly I’m concerned about previous blogwars over publishing people’s contact info to threaten them or encourage others to threaten them)
I think I’m on piny/ ilyka’s side on this one, but I don’t really think this is the right way to put it. They wrote to her employer to criticize something she did on the job, right? Blogging is part of her job. That’s a little different from calling up the random law firm or video store where someone works.
I’m mulling around the whole issue of bloggers’ natural protectiveness of their friends. It makes me nervous, to be perfectly honest, that we seem to think it’s appropriate for high-profile bloggers to use their power to attack and crush people who insult their friends. It would be considered inappropriate in the traditional media, I think. It would violate conflict of interest rules. But high-profile bloggers tend to deny that they have power or an obligation to use that power ethically, and they act like protecting your friends via blog is just like defending your friends in an ordinary social situation. I’m not so sure that’s right, although I understand the impulse.
Her email address and the email addresses of others at the station.
(Waves back to Ilyka and says, it’s FRA, not MRA.)
It kinda reminds me of a wedding message board I used to be on and when one of the women canceled her wedding, her small group of friends closed ranks and started berating people who were innocently asking how things had gone who didn’t know it had been canceled. It got very, very ugly very quickly and I got myself into a lot of trouble trying to defend the people who were being attacked.
So, yeah, as someone who was chased off a message board for trying to stand up to a powerful clique, I’m getting a few heebie-jeebies from this.
So, yeah, as someone who was chased off a message board for trying to stand up to a powerful clique, I’m getting a few heebie-jeebies from this.
That’s terribly ironic reading that from you, Mnemosyne…. Perhaps it was a look in the mirror.
A failure of a reader to understand what is being communicated is a failure of the writer to properly communicate it.
This is as silly as the opposing position (i.e., that the writer’s alleged intent is all that matters and the writer supposedly bears no additional responsibility beyond that).
If you say “the sky is blue” and I say “why do you claim the sky is red?” it does not demonstrate your failure to communicate. Also, your principle would lead to there never being an incorrect answer to a reading comprehension question, which would really screw up SAT scoring.
This whole thing seems to largely amount to (1) people being unable to apprehend sarcasm and (2) manifesting their underlying jerkiness in various and sundry ways.
Forgot to tag that first sentence as a blockquote, my apologies.
w00t! testify!
but, yeah.
Donna called it over at ilyka’s: the bottom line is almost never the thing itself, it’s how people act in response.
Seriously, just in general, how -hard- is this?
YOU’RE RIGHT. I FUCKED UP. I’M SORRY. HOW CAN I MAKE THIS BETTER?
*splutter* belledame, how dare you suggest that there was a better way to handle this?! I mean, really. *huff*
[/sarcasm]
YOU’RE RIGHT. I FUCKED UP. I’M SORRY. HOW CAN I MAKE THIS BETTER?
And miss out on all the drama and shit, and what would people do with a slow night then? Make love to their SO? Watch TV? You’re trying to take all the fun out of life, belledame222. [pout]
Hm, I need to get back in touch with my middle school English teachers. I had no idea my clumsy interpretations of Elizabethan drama were William Shakespeare’s fault. That bastard consigned me to a D in 6th Grade English.
Sarcasm aside, this is just sloppy, sloppy thinking. Unless I’m somehow misinterpreting it. In which case, shame on you.
I’d like to add to what was said in comment #20. Here’s a quick roundup of misogynist comments that have been made on various message boards re: this whole dustup:
From here:
From here:
From the comments on this post comes a lovely aping of JG’s satirical style:
Funny!
From here:
From here:
Now, I don’t know if JG is a misogynist or not, although he’s definitely a big asshole; and I know he’s not responsible for everything that gets posted by his supporters. The thing is, though, he’s been all too willing to wade into the comment threads in many of these places (including this thread) and defend himself loudly and often arrogantly; but he has not ONCE, so far as I’ve seen, denounced his own supporters, many of whom are the ones spewing the misogynist crap I’ve quoted above. So — he’ll loudly defend himself against charges of misogyny, but he won’t take on people, even on his own blog, who say the most reprehensible shit in the cause of defending him? Apparently he finds it more offensive for people to dare question his motives than for people to post horribly reprehensible shit about women. These so-called “progressive” men make me fucking sick, and this whole thing is NO LONGER about whether Gilbert did the right thing or not: it’s about all of these liberal dude misogynists crawling out of the woodwork.
patriotboy, i read your post, your first sentence called it hers. Wow, later you expanded on where the post came from. Great.
Your “excuse” that hers is an abc affiliate, his was not, is a pitiful excuse. You of course don’t need to link to his site, but who cares right, no need to say anything specifically about the person who actually wrote it.
Oh, and I believe Ilkya said JG did a sexist thing, not that he is a “misogynist fuck”.
[...] instead go after a woman who merely provided a link (piny of Feministe has a good roundup here). I know that JG and Gilliard were friends, and th [...]
What? Britney picked up a reprehensible piece of racist garbage directed at someone who just died, printed it with the title “Schooling the Left,” and did so using a mainstream-media megaphone. The fact that she works for an ABC affiliate, and that it is her job — not to mention her moral obligation as a human being — not to give the original poster a platform as though he were an actual human being
She is not some sort of information-sorting robot, or any sort of common carrier. She is the official blogger using a name that has a certain amount of credibility. The platform she’s standing on comes with a paycheck, but it also comes with a responsibility, as she is associated with a news company that purports, at least, to represent the actual state of the world.
She gets a choice between being the official mouthpiece of an organization that people believe represents “truth”, and the paycheck that comes with it, and the ability to just slap links on the web without being somewhat responsible if people actually take them seriously. She gets to pick one of these things. She doesn’t get both.
– ACS
For the last time: The title was “Teaching Libs a Lesson.” It’s right here.
A blogging gig for an ABC affiliate station in Nashville is a mainstream-media megaphone? I suppose technically, but funny thing: an Alexa.com comparison shows the “Nashville Is Talking” web site tied with “Jesus’ General” for traffic. Is “Jesus’ General” a megaphone?
And when did it become your job to decide what her job is? Excuse me–was.
You know what? I give up. What this amounts to is that deep down, some of you really feel that if you’re only upset and grief-stricken enough, you have the right to lash out against anyone, for any reason, in any way you see fit, and you don’t even have to correctly remember the name of what outraged you in the first place. You don’t have to spell her name right, you don’t have to believe or even address anything she says–nothing. Because you’re so upset.
The world is not a safe space. The “actual state of the world,” I’m sorry to say, is that there are plenty of racist assholes out there willing to write posts like “Death of a House Negro.” One can either ignore them or shine a light on them, but the last thing I want to do in this actual unsafe state of this actual unsafe world is pillory the people who choose “shine a light” when the real problem is not the light, but the cockroaches that light reveals.
You believe “ignore” is the only valid moral choice. I disagree. And I disagree vehemently that this choice is yours to determine absolutely. The choice in this particular case was Brittney’s; you didn’t like it, which I understand. What I don’t understand is where in Sam Hill you got the idea that not liking her choice automatically granted you the right to mete out punishment.
There we stand.
It seems liberals have nothing better to do than go after their own. I’m not sure why, mind you, but contacting people’s employers/institutions/&c. seems to be the thing to do these days.
“And I think that if some of your commenters seem to be calling Brit a dumb cooze, you might want to take a step back and look at exactly what the subtext is here.
In other words, fuck you, JG, and a special fuck you to Mel Gibson up there. And I’m not being even a little bit facetious.”
Well. First of all Mel Gibson is an asshole, I may be, but I’m not Mel. I want to thank you for setting a reasoned tone at the outset of your thread, here.
I’ll have to take everybody’s word for everything they say about me, because well, y’know that’s just the way it is.
I’m not sure HOW I apologized for what is apparently a boundlessly vile thing to say, so I will here:
Brittney, I am sorry for having referred to you as “kitten”. There, is that enough? I can do lots more apologizing if it will make everybody happy. Really, I don’t mind. I’ve been wrong almost all of my life and well, it’s just one more instance of me calling the kettle half empty and you calling the glass black.
I feel; well, actually, I’m not sure how I feel. I thought it was the General that got Brittney fired, excuse me, caused her to quit. But apparently it was my use of the word, “Kitten” (with it’s horribly demeaning subtext) that caused the avalanche that swept Brittney from her place at the helm of the blog.
I have been reading on Brittney’s former blog, Jesus General’s blog and now, here all about what an asshole, misogynist, prick, bully, yada,yada,yada he is. I have also been getting told that I’m some of those things or that I’m, as one of the General’s thoughtslaves compelled to do his bidding in the WaronBrittney.
Folks, I don’t think you have a lot of grounds for complaint since about 10 minutes after the mudslinging started. If what I said about Brittney was so horrible but what she did in posting that incredibly vile piece of crap comment by Smantix and linking to it, under her headline, on a website that is under the corporate control of ABC/Disney, with no disclaimer, caveat or, in fact, any comment by her is okay with you folks well, welcome to “Up is down”.
In case anyone missed it, earlier in this comment, I apologized. Not that I felt like I had anything to apologize for, but it seems to have been a desired, if not required action on my part. Brittney, thank God, is alive and can read, cut and paste and post my apology, which is a clear indication that I was ignorant, misogynistic and a just plain mean man. Meantime, Steve Gilliard, well, you know.
That piece at the top of the post is, I assume, someone’s carefully measured response to the Generals (or my) name calling and all around nastiness. It certainly would make me feel better to say something as terrible as that about someone and then expect them to treat my complaint about the mistreatment/abuse of one of their “stars” by me or the General as valid. What is with that “…if some of your commenters seem to be calling Brit a dumb cooze…”? Did someone actually say that or are you projecting? I certainly didn’t say that and I don’t remember anyone else saying it on the General’s blog. Now It might have been said, somewhere, but I don’t think there.
You folks can hate on me as much as you feel is necessary. It would be wonderfully refreshing, however, if one of you or perhaps Brittney herself would apologize, not to the General, who never asked for an apology to himself, but to the friends of Steve Gilliard who were, I feel certain, pretty upset by the post. Trust me I’m very okay with nothing but your contempt and disdain.
democommie (not Mel Gibson–he’s richer and much, much worse)
“Not that I felt I had anything to apologize for…” voids the apology. In fact, it makes you even more of an asshole than you were before.
And, you asshole, there’s a difference between posting something someone else said and saying something yourself. You actually did make with the sexist condescension towards Brittney. She didn’t actually say anything horrible about Steve–but from the way you and patriotboy have behaved, you aren’t admitting that.
How is
Stop seeing chauvinism and misogyny in every shadow, it makes you look stupid.
misogynistic?
How does that statement indicate the author hates women? Would it be anti-semitic to say, “stop seeing anti-semitism in every shadow, it makes you look stupid.” Is it racist to say, “stop seeing racism in every shadow?”
These may be dumb and ignorant statements, but I don’t see the misogyny or anti-semitism or racism behind them. But perhaps you can explain?
How is “The Patriarchy”, as you put it, is an invisible sky enemy that you use as an excuse to promote hate and wage war against half of humanity as well as any women that disagrees with you. Misogynistic? Not believing in the patriarchy is an offense against women? How many women believe in the patriarchy? Questioning the feminist interpretation of the patriarchy is misogynistic? Stating that the feminist interpretation of the patriarchy promotes hate is migogynistic? How so? How are these statements which could be right or wrong, dumb or insightful, how do these statements show a hatred of the class of women?
Most of those statements question feminism, but few of those statements if any have anything derogatory to say about women.
Is questioning feminism now all that it takes to be a misogynist?
Contextualizing My New Number-One Fan
In several active threads at the blogs I read, commenter “anon” has made it his mission to inform the feminist blogging community that I used to be a supporter of George W. Bush and the global war on terror. Shocking, I realize, and certainly somethi…
Well, boys, let’s look at the hand again:
Why are you spending all of your time attacking Brittany, who even you admit was only re-posting another blogger’s essay with an insufficiently snarky headline? Why are you not saying one word about the (male) blogger who actually wrote the words that you’re so incensed about?
At this point, you seem to be getting quite a thrill talking about what a stupid whore Brittney is while giving the guy who
insulted Steve a free pass.
You’re demanding that Brittany personally apologize to Steve’s friends and family for words that someone else wrote, and you’re not demanding an apology from the guy who actually wrote the words.
When you persist in attacking the woman who repeated the words rather than the man who wrote the words, you start to look pretty — oh, what’s the word — misogynistic. It makes you look like you’re not willing to call a fellow male on his shit, so you’ll take the easy way out and attack a woman.
Yes. Which means that we’re all the Borg here, and so it’d be a waste of your time to continue trying to argue with our brainwashes mass’d selves. Good morning!
For an example of how JG is not only NOT calling his syncophantic army’s out on their sexist and misogynistic comments, but actually appears to be egging them on, I offer up his reply to one of my comments on his thread:
For context, I had commented:
I had enjoyed reading Jesus’ General, but had never checked the comments. Now that I have seen the true face of so many of it’s devotees, not to mention a major blogger who does not find statements like “I made a mistake” and “I have nothing to apologize for” to be non-sequitors, I, for one, will be staying away until and unless The General comes down off of his high horse and decides making a mistake is, indeed, worth an apology.
I think that he needs to address some of the really out of bounds sexist hate-speech his followers have engaged in, and not spur them on.
One note: Upon re-reading all of Brittney Gilbert’s statements, I have not seen any public apology either. For my comment, I was taking JG’s word for it as he states
I think she would do well to apologize for not being more clear, also, even though I immediately “got” her snarky title and did, indeed, make her disagreement known quickly in her comments.
Tiny Cat Pants apologized and she didn’t even have anything to apologize for.
Apologies are free, people. They hurt no one and tend to heal everyone.
As for excuses, well, just like the other well worn cliche, they are like assholes, everyone has one.
But, what do I know? I’m just an ittybitty blogger who doesn’t even give a rat’s ass if anyone listens, or links, to me.
(And no, I am NOT obsessed with asses.)
None of you, none, no-one of you, has any idea how horrible that “Patriot-boy” who calls himself Jesus’ General really is.
For starters, he is only a minor Major, at best.
As for the rest, being as I am a proto-crypto-feminist, I will not subject the delicate fenimine nerve-tissues of this blogs graceful readers by detailing the practices and habits of this so-called “General”.
You will just have to guess.
Good Morning:
It’s democommie, small “d” ( I can almost hear some comments about it matching my, whatever)
This is my last comment, here, on this matter–I promise. I actually spent far more time and energy on it than I wanted to, but, though everything I’m saying here is probably wrong (iyo) I wanted to do what I could to be clear. Whatever other things you say about me will have to read by others. It’s a long commute, virtually, and I have lots of other people to misunderstand and persecute. It’s also way too nice a day to sit at the kitchen table while the sun is shining and the bugs are whining.
Piny;
I think it should read, “you, asshole,…”.
My apology doesn’t count, because I qualified it? You must not have gotten the “invisible context” (you can ask Mr. SEK about that, per his conversations with Ghost of Adolph Rupp) or my intent. Sorry.
I’m fairly certain, based on what I’ve read here about me , that there is nothing I could do that would put the genie back in the bottle.
Mnemosyne:
Your comment:
“Well, boys, let’s look at the hand again:
Why are you spending all of your time attacking Brittany, who even you admit was only re-posting another blogger’s essay with an insufficiently snarky headline? Why are you not saying one word about the (male) blogger who actually wrote the words that you’re so incensed about?
My response:
I think I’v made it quite clear that I think Smantix is a racist and an idiot. I think he would love to engage, on his home turf, where he can allow or not allow comments as he sees fit. He is certainly lurking somewhere (like an arsonist, asshats like him love to revisit the scene of the crime to view their “work”). I have not “admitted” that Brittney “only” did anything. What she did is a matter of record. I have been spending the bulk of my time answering people who have insisted that Brittney has done nothing wrong (untrue–no qualification at all on this). Brittney herself has not seen fit to reply to my e-mail or present any substantive defense for her actions in the posting itself or subsequent to the posting.
Your comment:
At this point, you seem to be getting quite a thrill talking about what a stupid whore Brittney is while giving the guy who actually
insulted Steve a free pass.
My response:
“Whore”, “Cooze”–nasty, nasty words that I have not used in any comment I made about Brittney on any forum or in any way, whatsoever. Those two words are a pair that I haven’t seen used anywhere but here (and, no, I have hardly read everything written about this). I did say a number of nasty things about Brittney but they are certainly no worse than anything that has been said about me by you folks. It’s not that I’m trying to justify my comments, I’m not sorry for what I said about her actions, I just didn’t use the words that I quoted at the top of this paragraph. I stand by what I said about Brittney’s behavior. The “kitten” remark was what it was. Lemme see, my “Kitten” versus someone here’s “Fuck you!”. Yup, I can clearly see “Kitten” being the nastier thing to say.
As for giving Smantix a free pass, he’s been denigrated by hundreds of comments at many different locations. Going to his website/blog only helps him. I’m quite sure, given the tone of his “obit” that he is an abolutely hate-filled piece of shit and simply revels in the turmoil that all of this created. My “Bringing him breakfast in bed”, so to speak is not in the cards.
Your comment:
You’re demanding that Brittany personally apologize to Steve’s friends and family for words that someone else wrote, and you’re not demanding an apology from the guy who actually wrote the words.
My Response:
I’m not demanding and never did demand an apology. I suggested that one might be in order. Folks on both sides of this pissing contest have “demanded” all sorts of things, I don’t think I have–if I have I absolutely rescind all demands from this moment on.
Your comment:
When you persist in attacking the woman who repeated the words rather than the man who wrote the words, you start to look pretty — oh, what’s the word — misogynistic. It makes you look like you’re not willing to call a fellow male on his shit, so you’ll take the easy way out and attack a woman.”
My reply (to the end of the page):
Gosh, that is an amazing leap. I attack a woman instead of a man and I’m a misogynist (I said far worse things about Smantix than I said about Brittney–and I‘m certain he‘s reading this stuff that‘s all over the web and thinking he‘s just the neatest person on the planet–what an asshole) . I think that what you’re saying in that statement is the equivalent of someone’s saying that if I attack George Bush I’m anti-Christian (forgetting for a moment that George is certainly not a follower of that Galileean gentleman‘s ethic or moral guidance) or, that if I attack Condoleeza Rice I am an anti-black misogynist. It simply doesn’t wash. Regardless of what you think about me I’m quite comfortable with women having every right that I have, making the same pay for the same work, being ordained clergy, holding high government office, whatever. I have worked for women and with women on a numer of jobs. Their gender was never an issue (curiously enough; in my last job it was a serious issue with my gay male co-worker).
Am I always sensitive to gender issues? Of course not, I’m human (and it does cut both ways). Am I confident that I would have responded differently had the post in question been written by a woman and re-posted, with a link, and without a disclaimer or any sort of qualification, by a man? You bet I am. I would have demanded an apology from him, I would have told him that I thought he was a hate-filled piece of shit and a fucking asshole. I would have written a much nastier e-mail.
You will note, please, that I have not said these things to Brittney, I have not said them to you. If you read my comments you will see that I have said some very nasty things to a number of folks who took a shot at me. If I know they are men (or if they speak and identify as such) they get both barrels. If they are women I tend to avoid making remarks that are as nasty. I grew up with six sisters–I learned early on that they would simply not tolerate the sort of language that men were comfortable with (although in a moment of anger they might use the same tone and words).
Don’t get the idea that it’s important to me that you “get” where I’m coming from. I don’t think that you want to. I think you would rather be pissed off and blame me and others like me for making the world a shitty place–get over it–that‘s a suggestion, not a demand.
My life has certainly not been an idyll in Eleysian Fields. I’ve been fucked over, I’ve done some fucking over. I try to live the best life I can. Your characterizations of me are simply that. I’m not anybody you know. If you met me, we might or might not have a conversation. If you decide that I’m a misogynist based on your perception that I attacked Brittney (who really, really did do something idiotic) then it doesn’t bode well. It’s okay. Many more folks than any of us will ever meet walk this earth. We don’t have to meet again.
Well, as I used to tell a very nice (but equal to me in terms of being hot-tempered) woman I lived with. I wrong you, you point it out, I will apologize–once. You accept it, fine. You don’t accept it, that’s fine too.
I mean this very sincerely; regardless of what you think of me I wish you (and I mean everyone on this blogthread, supporters of Brittney and Brittney) a good, safe and abundant life. That’s it. I’m out of your lives.
Democommie
Nope. I’m saying that if you attack Condoleeza Rice for actions that George Bush has taken, and do it in a condescending and sexist way, but don’t attack George Bush for the actions that he took, that makes you a misogynist, straight up.
You attacked the easy target, and you have no idea why that was wrong, do you?
And it astounds me that Brittney apologized AND resigned her position and it’s still not good enough for you. You’re still out for her blood, and you’re still running around complaining about how horrible she is. What the hell? Do you want her in jail for hurting your fee-fees?
Obviously a lot of this was just due to mistakes and fast reactions–fast posting, fast reacting to post, resigning over reactions to the post. But I honestly did not see an apology. Her resignation read to me like she was sick of blogging in general.
I read the first post and my reaction was the same as JG’s. For what it’s worth, I’m female and feminist. (I’d never read Brittney before the whole eruption.)
Well said, Democommie. Very gracious and eloquent. Thank you.
[...] ver the past year and change, and nothing prevents me from abusing it. This is why this bothers me so much–and why I’ [...]
democommie sent me email? Wow, must have ended up in my Folder for Kittens file.
[...] sted by zuzu @ 3:47 pm
I’m taking an indefinite break from the blog. Recent discussions have gotten me too upset to continue [...]
Brittney has a Folder for Kittens file? Cool!
Yep, there’s nothing actually in it, though. Just links to other people’s posts making fun of various kittens who met an untimely demise. Dead kittens – they’re what Nashville is talking about!