EM: I'm outta there

[vmichel]

It worries me a bit that younger women might believe the stereotype that some of the guys projected on to us -- that the trouble was the old crones, the hairy-legged man-haters, the boring older evil feminists who don't get queer theory, in other words.

Obviously, I didn't believe that there was such a "side," and I really don't want those of us who came here to be cast that way or to think of ourselves that way.

It's a really good observation that it was the young, straight, white males who defined that conflict.

Thinking back on my experiences, I agree completely.

Things would get het up between a woman and RB, for instance, but it was the young straight men who fixated on the disagreement and turned it into something larger. Not in a mean-spirited way, but in an unconsciously self-centered way.

Interesting...

[fern hill]

It worries me a bit that younger women might believe the stereotype that some of the guys projected on to us -- that the trouble was the old crones, the hairy-legged man-haters, the boring older evil feminists who don't get queer theory, in other words.

Ok, I says to self, I think I know what queer theory is, but do I?

Googled and found this. It seems to be a lecture from someone at the University of Colorado.

http://www.colorado.edu/English/courses/ENGL2012Klages/queertheory.html

The word "queer" in queer theory has some of these connotations, particularly its alignment with ideas about homosexuality. Queer theory is a brand-new branch of study or theoretical speculation; it has only been named as an area since about 1991. It grew out of gay/lesbian studies, a discipline which itself is very new, existing in any kind of organized form only since about the mid-1980s. Gay/lesbian studies, in turn, grew out of feminist studies and feminist theory. Let me tell you a little about this history. (It's interesting in its own right, because it is literally happening under our noses, in our classrooms, at this moment; it's also interesting as a way of seeing how theoretical movements or schools grow out of other schools, as we've already seen with the bricolage that emerges from Saussure to Derrida to Lacan to Cixous and Irigaray).

I read it and found, yup, I do know what queer theory is.

[Timebandit]

What's been fascinating me about EnMasse, and all the psycho bad chi ricocheting around there, is that pretty much all of the combatants were also babblers, and yet somehow that festering zit never popped at babble.  I can't help wondering if Audra just somehow suppressed that, or if people knew it wouldn't fly, or what.  I actually kind of wished she could have dropped by and shamed some people, because I suspect that in a weird way, it would have worked.  Somehow when Audra said to knock it off, people seemed to.

I think it has a lot to do with consistency.  Audra was the final say.  On EnMasse, you have moderation by committee, and it's very difficult to moderate consistently that way.

That's my theory, anyway.

That and, when users become moderators, this kind of shit almost always happens, on every board I've observed that has made users moderators.  I used to post on Sympatico fora before babble (actually, that's where I discovered babble), and the users promoted to moderators being so obnoxious or letting certain friends have more leeway was largely the reason I left that board.

It's also happened to the boards on the website my sweetie manages.  

So there's my theory #2. :)

[Scout]

The post itself didn't bother me so much, but the general reaction to our objections about it bothered me a hell of a lot.

I agree with this but I think the post was still meant to be bait. It was meant to get whoever took exception based on who the posters was suspended in my opinion.

Because why else would RB, who has made his opinion clear about the FF at babble and then the one at EnMasse think his opinion on any feminist issue was relevant, welcome or anything but inappropriate? Why contribute to a forum he thinks is filled with scum? And to chose to to contribute to a thread about female sexuality an anatomy?

What would have been reasonable long ago is that he be told to stay the hell away from it period if they couldn't bear to ban him instead of expecting women to put up and shut up.

But thanks to his handy work here we all are andafter being bullied, insulted, harassed on 2 seperate forums by the same guy and his groupies over a period of years I'm done. I'd rather move along. Because why would I want to stay at a space that accepts people like that and blamed me for it? Life's too short and there are too many other cool nice people I'd rather talk to.

[Timebandit]

Because why else would RB, who has made his opinion clear about the FF at babble and then the one at EnMasse think his opinion on any feminist issue was relevant, welcome or anything but inappropriate? Why contribute to a forum he thinks is filled with scum? And to chose to to contribute to a thread about female sexuality an anatomy?

He's just pissing on posts (pun not really intended) to mark EnMasse as his territory, just so we all know who's top dog.

Most women I know or have been with do seem to like things inserted into their vagina during sex - fingers, tongues, vibrators, penises, fists, food, etc... Is it the over-generalization that is offensive?  I don't really get it.   :oops:

What bothered me was that the theory of why women like to have things inserted into their vaginas was coming from a man. A gay man, to boot, because I am assuming that as a gay man, he has even less interest than straight men in female sexuality and anatomy. Of course, I could be completely wrong about that. How on earth could he even begin to comprehend what it must feel like to have a clitoris, and what it must feel like to have something inserted into a vagina? He can't. Misogyny? I don't know. I personally don't think he intended for it to be that way, but other women do, and I respect that. Everybody's sensitivities are different.

The reaction that it is somehow different and more offensive to post a similar comment in the RR bothered me even more. As did the silencing of public discussion on the issue.

Looking back at what he is allowed to get away with, and what most have not been able to, it is painfully obvious how much is wrong with EM. He is allowed to shriek and throw his temper tantrums and create conflicts over and over again even when nobody said anything offensive against him (like vmichel's post to explain why women were offended). Holly has to call him a fucking idiot just once, and is immediately given a warning.

Scout said exactly what I was thinking. Life is too short.

[vmichel]

To be fair, I complained about RB's post to me and I see today that he edited it per a moderator pm.

[fern hill]

I revisited that thread to see how much grace he mustered in the editing. (A: not much.) I had missed Tehanu's comment about who was on-line, how many of them women. Like, hardly any. True, isn't it?

[shaolin]

I've looked to see how many women are logged in several times today - never more than one or two, including female mods.  I was reading a few topics but I can't bring myself to log in or post.  Yup, I'm here for good now.

[Mandos]

I dunno, but for some reason I just follow skdadl around.  Even if I'm not agreeing with her, somehow I end up following skdadl.

[skdadl]

:D

I knew I felt a draft.

Excuse me: a draught.

[Gigi]

Well, I finally signed up (been busy this week), and to reply to an earlier request that we only discuss other boards on those boards, the problem is that if you actually do anything that remotely resembles truthfully discussing those board, your thread will be closed and you will be warned.  (Was that oblique enough?)

And then the moderators will bend over backwards to kiss the asses of the people who are causing the biggest problems.

And then you will get private messages asking you to play nice with the problem people "for the good of the board," even though the problem people apparently don't have to play nice.

(You will also get a few nice messages saying that people agree with you and an invitation to come over here ;-) )

Oh, and as I just pointed out in a PM to a person who asked me to "play nice" the problem with the board is that there are a couple of individuals who have decided that they are going to be the "last man standing".  And the moderators are perfectly willing to go along with it.

[fern hill]

Hi, Gigi. You describe the situation pretty well.  

Oh, and as I just pointed out in a PM to a person who asked me to "play nice" the problem with the board is that there are a couple of individuals who have decided that they are going to be the "last man standing".  And the moderators are perfectly willing to go along with it.

:mrgreen:

[skdadl]

Hey, look who's here! It's the cute pussycat!

Gigi, you go get that avatar right now, y'hear?  And welcome.  :)

[Gigi]

Hey, look who's here! It's the cute pussycat!

Gigi, you go get that avatar right now, y'hear?  And welcome.  :)

Thanks!

And Paasht says she's not "cute", she's vicious.  VICIOUS! Ya hear? ;-)

Now she's going to go beat up the german shepherd next door to prove it!