Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Men's Group

Showing Original Post only (View all)

theKed

(1,235 posts)
Mon Apr 8, 2013, 11:17 AM Apr 2013

Was this really necessary? [View all]

Automated Message: You have been blocked from a group

You have been blocked from posting in the History of Feminism group by boston bean. If you believe this is an error, you may contact boston bean for more information.


So I was wandering through some of the DU Groups, this morning, that I check out from time to time (Cooking & Baking, Science Fiction, and, yes, History of Feminism) and reading a few threads. This one, "When Men on the Left Refuse to See Their Sexism" was new, so I read through it. Somebody named 'sigmasix' posts this:

I think you probably should edit your post so that it reads "some men" or even "a large number of men"- the way this OP is worded can be taken to mean that all men are this way. I'm sure that isn't what you meant to indicate though.


Strange. Kind of like he didn't realise the article was quoted from elsewhere. Of course, that's because there's no cues that it is: no quotation marks, no excerpt tags, no by-line, nor link, until the very bottom. Not that this is a big problem, but it's clearly confused some people as to the author of the writing. So I posted. The first time I'd ever posted in that group (and, might I add, trying hard to be diplomatic):

theKed
It may help

if you make it more apparent from the outset that you're quoting an article.
I was a good 2 or 3 paragraphs in before I scrolled down to see it there was a link. If you put it in quotations, or even dropped a by-line at the top, it would go a long way to clearing that up. (I would say 'excerpt' tags, but you have them throughout the quote and I honestly don't know if DU does nested excerpts like that).


Cool. I didn't mention anything about the body of the article, for or against. Inoffensive as I could make it, I thought.

seabeyond
no. i am not playing this stupid ass game. again...

thank you for the suggestion AND no.


Well, that seemed oddly belligerent. Did seabeyond misunderstand me? Is it some sort of massive affront to suggest a quotation mark at the start of the article, standard procedure when, you know, quoting? So I responded, diplomatically, again, I might add:

theKed
What game?

I'm entirely earnest and honest. It's not readily apparent that you're quoting somebody, and that might be contributing to at least 2 people not realising and asking you to alter the text.


Clarifying that it really wasn't my problem, that I was trying to help make it clear that the quote was a quote, and that I didn't think she should alter the text. So what's next?

seabeyond
first... this is the way OP after OP is created. title. then article in body

of text.

if you are confused over this ONE piece, you might ask yourself why.

secondly, another form of derailing men use when women speak up... ok, SOME men use when SOME women speak up is having to clarify with a some, many, vast, few, handful, before we can say anything.

the reality and simplicity is, if it does not apply to you (which i would suggest it does apply to you reading your posts) then do not take it as being one of the MEN that the article refers to.


Ad hominem attacks, obviously. Suggesting a quotation mark at the start of a quote is sexist, somehow. Remember, of course, that I was purposefully avoiding discussing the actual article in question since, well, I don't think my opinion is really valued on such topics 'round there. So...yeah. I was going to respond with this:

I really didn't come here looking for a fight

I read the article and, as I said, sorted out that it was an outside article eventually. And I noticed other people maybe not realising it was a quoted article, and offered a suggestion to make that more apparent. It's not a "game" and it's not intended to "derail" anything. It's a " at the start and end of it, to clear up any confusion. If it were anyone else's post and I saw people not getting that it was quoted, I would do the same thing.

I don't want to continue this debate, because it has no bearing on the article in question.


But...apparently I have been blocked on, I don't know, orthographical grounds?
Frankly such a blocking is a wild abuse of power, and utterly baseless.
91 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Was this really necessary? [View all] theKed Apr 2013 OP
I agree with you... nebenaube Apr 2013 #1
HoF is a protected group and they can run it any way they want. rrneck Apr 2013 #2
agreed. their echo chamber is their right. galileoreloaded May 2013 #91
It's a purge. lumberjack_jeff Apr 2013 #3
Nothing wild there. Just SOP ProudToBeBlueInRhody Apr 2013 #4
i like sigmasix. he is a thinker. i can always appreciate that in agreement or not. nt seabeyond Apr 2013 #5
Do you theKed Apr 2013 #6
i did not read it. nt seabeyond Apr 2013 #8
It's quoted above theKed Apr 2013 #9
I don't want to continue this debate, because it has no bearing on the article in question seabeyond Apr 2013 #12
DRIVE BY! snooper2 Apr 2013 #18
shake it out, shake it out seabeyond Apr 2013 #19
me too, I said one damn thing and was immediately blocked quinnox Apr 2013 #7
C'mon guys. That was the purpose of the thread. lumberjack_jeff Apr 2013 #11
Me too. Soundman Apr 2013 #45
Welcome to the club Major Nikon Apr 2013 #10
If I had known my membership card to the club theKed Apr 2013 #13
Hey Warren D got blocked from there without ever making a post ProudToBeBlueInRhody Apr 2013 #14
How about a free video? Major Nikon Apr 2013 #17
I've been blocked from a group libodem Apr 2013 #15
Don't let it get you down! Vinnie From Indy Apr 2013 #20
The women do seem to have a very conservative bent libodem Apr 2013 #25
Free throught and free speech are always pretty Buffalo Bull Apr 2013 #21
"They know it when they see it" libodem Apr 2013 #24
Free speech is primary; thank you for the warning Buffalo Bull Apr 2013 #36
Agree libodem Apr 2013 #38
I have made an official complaint against this group, History of Feminism, in ask the admins forum quinnox Apr 2013 #16
And, of course, polmaven Apr 2013 #22
nope, didn't say that quinnox Apr 2013 #23
I admire your gumption libodem Apr 2013 #26
no problem quinnox Apr 2013 #27
I think he must know libodem Apr 2013 #28
I think he does know quinnox Apr 2013 #29
They seem to represent the Phyllis Schaffly faction libodem Apr 2013 #30
But if you criticize that, you're criticizing all of "Feminism" Warren DeMontague Apr 2013 #31
Good graphic libodem Apr 2013 #33
I had one yesterday where someone was following a DU member around throwing a quote from one of Warren DeMontague Apr 2013 #34
It's not sudden LadyHawkAZ Apr 2013 #42
Precisely how? LanternWaste Apr 2013 #89
I think if you want to reply to a post that contains the words "lately" Warren DeMontague Apr 2013 #90
The new rules on limiting alerts seems to have many of them spun up Major Nikon Apr 2013 #43
I was under the impression.. Upton Apr 2013 #46
I thought so too ProudToBeBlueInRhody Apr 2013 #48
Tied for 2nd most in last 90 days it seems Major Nikon Apr 2013 #51
Oh, but that's because.... ProudToBeBlueInRhody Apr 2013 #54
Evidently Major Nikon Apr 2013 #50
Surprisingly enough, the "examples" of "sexism and misogyny" mostly seem to be, instead, Warren DeMontague Apr 2013 #52
There's a difference? Major Nikon Apr 2013 #53
Ahh... but you see, apparently the sock thing was all an innocent misunderstanding.. opiate69 Apr 2013 #60
It's their group, they can run it how they want. Warren DeMontague Apr 2013 #32
OMG libodem Apr 2013 #35
Her "research" and groups affiliated with her have been repeatedly promoted on DU Warren DeMontague Apr 2013 #37
yuck libodem Apr 2013 #39
It does get very wearying. HappyMe Apr 2013 #40
Thank you libodem Apr 2013 #41
I don't think they have that much credibility. HappyMe Apr 2013 #44
Driving people away libodem Apr 2013 #47
They are not the new voice of feminism ProudToBeBlueInRhody Apr 2013 #49
This message was self-deleted by its author seaglass Apr 2013 #55
Most of us do that. For instance, I am a staunch supporter of choice, reproductive freedom, equality Warren DeMontague Apr 2013 #68
Okay, where's my cookie? I want my cookie! Warren DeMontague Apr 2013 #69
Also, for the record, this was NOT me. Warren DeMontague Apr 2013 #70
They're migrating west. name not needed Apr 2013 #81
And his name is ACTUALLY "Adam Sandler" Warren DeMontague Apr 2013 #82
And also.. opiate69 Apr 2013 #71
Yeah, I'm supposed to be one even though I'd never heard the term until people complained about it. Warren DeMontague Apr 2013 #73
It's exactly like... opiate69 Apr 2013 #74
just not all at once. Warren DeMontague Apr 2013 #75
lol.. no shit.. opiate69 Apr 2013 #76
What a cool pad! Warren DeMontague Apr 2013 #77
heh.. Steven Tyler better hope so opiate69 Apr 2013 #78
Fine, then... I'll see you Steven Tyler's house Warren DeMontague Apr 2013 #79
For some reason... and I mean, I know they made BRAZILLIONS... opiate69 Apr 2013 #80
I remember a story in the early 80s about someone's friend who was a very blissed out Warren DeMontague Apr 2013 #83
This message was self-deleted by its author seaglass Apr 2013 #84
Couple things. One, Gary Johnson is pretty different from Ed Meese. Warren DeMontague Apr 2013 #85
This message was self-deleted by its author seaglass Apr 2013 #86
Exactly. But logical fallacies abound on DU, particularly in certain corners. Warren DeMontague Apr 2013 #87
and the corollary... Buffalo Bull Apr 2013 #88
Meta was awash with it too. Gore1FL Apr 2013 #64
It floated over the top of the bowl libodem Apr 2013 #65
Just to maybe head off some of the accusations against you, opiate69 Apr 2013 #57
It is their space, it should be respected Buffalo Bull Apr 2013 #62
but in our space... beating the dead horse Buffalo Bull Apr 2013 #66
Necessary? Of course not. Wholly and pathetically predictable? opiate69 Apr 2013 #56
Oh, it doesn't really matter that you weren't looking for a fight... ElboRuum Apr 2013 #58
I'm still burning a little over a thread I started... TreasonousBastard Apr 2013 #59
I think the gender reference libodem Apr 2013 #61
The OP is talking shit about HoF. You posted that in Feminism. redqueen Apr 2013 #67
You're right... TreasonousBastard Apr 2013 #72
I have answer for a question you asked Gore1FL Apr 2013 #63
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Men's Group»Was this really necessary...»Reply #0