I may be new, but why is there such a hatred of this group?

[unreadierLizard]

There seem to be some people who don't like this group for whatever reason. I read a post talking about how a "majority group" shouldn't have a group of it's own.

I've only posted here once or twice but...I'm baffled by all of this. O.o

[BrutusBeefcake]

1. Good question nt

[Upton]

5. BrutusBeefcake?

That's almost as good as Trollhouse cookies..

[Warren Stupidity]

10. !

[jp11]

2. I think the idea of it is too disturbing for those who don't like it.

It would mean that many of their views are not exactly as they think they are.

It seems not to matter that the 'majority group' has put in place policy/law/etc that hurt their own 'members' it is not the exact same 'hurt' put on other groups.

All that seems to matter is that this same 'majority group' hurt other groups partially or fully outside itself. So whatever the majority group did to hurt members of itself doesn't matter because the majority group was busy inflicting injustice on others.

[westerebus]

3. We are caught in the cross fire. We meaning the men's group.

I posted here a few times in DU2. Just came by to see if anything had changed. It hasn't as far as I know.

There's a flame-war going on among some people. Go to Meta discussion, but, take two aspirin and maybe a six pack of your favorite adult beverage with you.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

4. Well, someone in Meta compared this forum to a "white supremacist" group being at DU

And that was a man.

Apparently some think this group should be allowed to exist, but only as long as we discuss some subjects that are truly "men's issues" and won't offend other groups, especially women/feminists. I believe one lovely longtime DU'er said that means prostate exams.

[lumberjack_jeff]

6. Well first, since words mean things, men are a minority in this country.

Second, there is a belief among a few vocal feminists at DU that advocating for men, or in fact even facilitating discussion of men's issues, is fundamentally inconsistent with a progressive website. That attitude predates this group by several years, so the faux concerns about the actual "tone" of the posts here fail the giggle test.

Most DU'ers disagree with this view, but the critics are very vocal.

Fair or not, the group is under a magnifiying glass. It is incumbent on each of us to be aware of, and strictly adhere to the terms of service of DU.

[unreadierLizard]

8. I think that is kind of dumb.

There are legitimate men's issues that should be discussed.

[Warren DeMontague]

7. Short answer? There isn't.

There is always heat and noise of some sort happening in H/M. Nothing new.

[Warren Stupidity]

9. There are a couple of people here who have targeted this group.

As a recent locked post demonstrates, there is a real problem where men's issues wander into right wing racist and male chauvinist bullshit. We have hosts for that. But screw the idiots who have this group under a microscope so they can ridicule it in h&m. Fuck that shit. Hey we are men, we can deal with it.

[Major Nikon]

11. That's why I only go to H&M when I need a good chuckle

Calling another group dysfunctional in H&M is pretty much the epitome of chutzpah.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

14. Sadly, H&M has more discussion of this group than is actually done here.

[lumberjack_jeff]

17. On the plus side, it's created a lot more traffic here.

[Kaleva]

18. “there’s no such thing as bad publicity”

I think for many DUers, this group was under the radar until there got to be considerable discusion about it in the H&M forum. I knew this existed but the first time I visited was when I was on a jury! LOL!

[Gore1FL]

19. I didn't come here until I ran into iverglas. n/t

[lumberjack_jeff]

22. May that be her lasting legacy.

[opiate69]

24. she already owes me several irony meters...

I think the delicious irony in that case would put me even further into the poor house than i am!

[Upton]

12. You tell me..

it would appear some DUers believe this group for whatever reason shouldn't exist. I've at times run across the same attitude, in varying degrees, when it comes to the Gungeon and Sports too. I'm sure there are other groups that are disliked by a few also..

Some folks just aren't content with staying away from a particular group they don't agree with on some issues, they feel the need to agitate for its removal as well. The whole thing is very strange..

[ElbarDee]

13. No ****.

I've read DU over the years (since 2005) but only joined lately because of the upcoming elections. However, since joining I am almost afraid to post. If you are new with a low post count, you are targeted.

Maybe on overtly, but since I have only posted on this group, covertly I wonder if the MIRT has it's eyes on me.

What's the point on joining a forum to talk to people with the same belief system as yours and you are too afraid to post?

[Warren DeMontague]

16. I wouldn't worry about it. Yeah, people are always suspicious of low post counts, but that's only

because of history and statistics. Most of your worst trolls, except the ones engaged in long-running disruption projects or clever moles, had low post counts when they crashed and burned. There's always going to be a period of time where it feels like you're on probation. Okay, you're aware of it, fine.

Being Democrats, we all have broad areas of agreement, so I can't imagine MIRT would really be a problem. They're not going to PPR someone unless it's real obvious they're here to cause shit, or a right-winger, or both.

Welcome to DU.

[Kaleva]

20. In the old Kerry/Edwards forum, there was a problem with the "Kerry Hawks".

The Kerry Hawks were a group who self appointed themselves to the job of hunting down and ridding the site of unbelievers and those weak in spirit. The self appointed leader of the Kerry Hawks was NEM (New England Mike), a person I'll never forget. NEM, according to him, was the biggest, bestest, toughest, roughest, most loyal supporter of Senator Kerry there ever was and since he posted that, it must then be true!

I'm rambling down memory lane but the point I'm trying to make is that in almost every political discussion board, there are members who appoint themselves to be gate keepers. While I didn't join here till early 2008, I lurked here during the 2004 election and even back then, I had the impression that those who had less then a 1,000 posts were treated with suspicion by some. Once a member got past that magic number, they had some street credibility and could get away with saying more without being jumped on as a newbie.

That being said, I consider DU to be the best political forum I've been a member of. It's well run and there's interesting discussion on numerous topics everywhere.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

21. I recall a guy who had over a grand that revealed himself......

.....as a double agent troll the night of the '04 election. It was pretty funny.

[Warren DeMontague]

23. Primary season is always fun.

Having an incumbent in the WH, we're spared that shit this go-around.

[Gore1FL]

15. It's not hatred.

There are just a few cyber-bullies with persecution complexes. They simply want to make noise.

This group seems like a worthy target based on other motives.

[libodem]

25. yep

You got it. Ding, ding, ding.