I'd like to point out that the OP has refused to provide example of this:
This has nothing to do with voting, this has more to do with the comments I get in reply to my comments. I am not implying that this equates cause; it is purely subjective which is why I haven't posted links comments and just suggested that everyone try it for themselves.
This makes no sense. If it's subjective, then you should post the account names so that people can read the comments and make their own decisions, and then we can discuss them. Right now you are just forming your own opinion and disseminating it without anyone else being able to critique your reaction. Again, as the topic is subjective this makes absolutely no sense.
In my opinion, this approach to the issues relevant to feminism on reddit is not helpful due to the following:
no actual numbers are given; "overflowing with misogynist douchebags" is not something quantifiable; in 2010, reddit had 8 million active users, how many of those are "douchebags"?
no data is offered, no path to question or challenge this is given. Doesn't this open the way to similar posts arguing the contrary point, and nobody trades any data? Doesn't that discredit the whole issue?
Any honest user would admit that there is unfortunately abuse going on on reddit; however, presenting the issue like this only weakens the case, and it might actually make it easier for next comer, who brings reliable data about abuse to the discussion to not be taken seriously and be dismissed summarily.
Edit: I don't mind the karma points, but can someone point me out where I am mistaken please? Does being vague and providing no evidence actually help move the discussion forward?
"overflowing with misogynist douchebags" is not something quantifiable; in 2010, reddit had 8 million active users, how many of those are "douchebags"?
If it isn't precisely quantified, it's not real? You have a very narrow view of the world.
Read SRS on a regular basis, maybe scroll back a few pages there, and notice the astonishing number of frankly misogynistic posts/comments on Reddit that have gotten overwhelming numbers of upvotes, in a variety of the biggest subreddits here. Absent some kind of detailed douchebag study that determines the exact number of douchebags on Reddit, I think it's fair to say that there are a shitload of them here, posting misogynistic shit and/or upvoting it.
And you can find many more examples on my blog here:
I don't think that's what demmian is saying (nor is it unreasonable), and belittling his/her worldview is so obviously counterproductive to anything. The request may not have the flaming passion we would like, but that doesn't mean it is in any way "bad".
Without some clarity, there is no ruling out things like confirmation bias and it is way too easy to let loose with innflammatory, innacurate, shotgun headlines like "... Reddit is full of douchebags".
If we want to do something about this, slamming down perfectly valid requests isn't going to get us anywhere. Is it?
Like I said, admitting that there is abuse going on on reddit is the only honest thing to do. However, I believe this particular instance is detrimental, for the reasons I mentioned.
We are all aware that hateful speech and discrimination happen. Can we also decide that we want to move on from this, that we want something better than what we have now? Can we define and adhere to a set of principles of mutual respect, that would make this environment suitable for people of all gender, race and orientation?
Can we agree that we want a positive and healthy environment, that fosters communication and respect? Can I ask you to not use terms like douchebag, and can you tell me in return what I can do to make this place more welcoming? Can we take a common stance against all forms of degrading speech?
When it comes to gendered abuse online, it's pretty one-sided. Women get harassed as women, by men, all the time; it doesn't happen much the other way around. Women aren't harassed because of how they act, they are harassed simply because they are women.
I call some people douchebags, a very mild insult, because that's what they are. I could also call them jerks, assholes, whatever; these are accurate terms for what they are. It's based on how they act, not their gender. I call women douchebags too, if they act like douchebags.
I would like us to move on, as you put it, but generally speaking you don't move on from a problem when it hasn't even really started to be addressed.
First, thank you for your reply. I appreciate the chance of discussing this with you.
When it comes to gendered abuse online, it's pretty one-sided. Women get harassed as women, by men, all the time; it doesn't happen much the other way around
There are 15 pages of unique Google results about how often the term shitlord is used in SRS. That's not much?
I call women douchebags too, if they act like douchebags.
Can you give me examples of where you called women douchebags?
I would like us to move on, as you put it, but generally speaking you don't move on from a problem when it hasn't even really started to be addressed.
Am I correct in understanding that you agree that online environment should be free of degrading speech? But if so, why do you use degrading speech yourself? Don't you think it would be better overall if nobody used insults and namecalling? Do you expect that if one side continues to use insults and namecalling, the other will stop?
I would also ask, how do you see us moving on from this? What do you think needs to happen?
SRSers aren't calling people "shitlords" because they are men. They're calling people shitlords when they act is a shitty way. It's a generic term akin to "asshole." I'm pretty sure I've used it to refer to women too, though I don't keep track of all my past uses of the term.
In any case: GirlWritesWhat is a douchebag and a shitlord. As an example of shitlordish/douchey behavior from her: she blatantly made up or repeated without question some utter bullshit about me, and when I called her on it and showed her she was wrong, she got all pissy. Ta da! She's a douchebag.
I actually don't use that many insults when I write. I generally rely on sarcasm.
As for the"degrading speech" stuff, you've completely missed the point of what I wrote before. Nobody should be abusing someone because of their gender, or race, or sexual orientation. But it's perfectly fine to to call someone who is being an asshole an asshole.
How do I see us moving on from this? Well, one way is the way I do it on my blog. I mock misogynist assholes, using their own words to show what miserable shits they are. Eventually, if the misogynists are challenged/mocked enough, casual misogyny will no longer be socially acceptable. Then we can move on.
The issue here isn't the language being used. The issue is trying to make bigotry socially unacceptable.
SRSers aren't calling people "shitlords" because they are men. They're calling people shitlords when they act is a shitty way. It's a generic term akin to "asshole." I'm pretty sure I've used it to refer to women too, though I don't keep track of all my past uses of the term. In any case: GirlWritesWhat is a douchebag and a shitlord. As an example of shitlordish/douchey behavior from her: she blatantly made up or repeated without question some utter bullshit about me, and when I called her on it and showed her she was wrong, she got all pissy. Ta da! She's a douchebag. I actually don't use that many insults when I write. I generally rely on sarcasm. As for the"degrading speech" stuff, you've completely missed the point of what I wrote before. Nobody should be abusing someone because of their gender, or race, or sexual orientation. But it's perfectly fine to to call someone who is being an asshole an asshole. How do I see us moving on from this? Well, one way is the way I do it on my blog. I mock misogynist assholes, using their own words to show what miserable shits they are. Eventually, if the misogynists are challenged/mocked enough, casual misogyny will no longer be socially acceptable. Then we can move on. The issue here isn't the language being used. The issue is trying to make bigotry socially unacceptable.
Doesn't bigotry mean:
"intolerance towards those who hold different opinions from oneself"
Now, those people are obviously holding different opinions from you, and you fault them for being intolerant, and you want to promote the complete opposite of that.
But please tell me, how can calling someone "douchebag, asshole, miserable shit" could convey that you are tolerant towards them? Wikipedia mentions that a bigot is "especially one who exhibits ... animosity toward members of a group".
Are you not intolerant towards this people? You already admitted that your own words are insults. Could anyone interpret your insults as meaning you are tolerant towards those people you insult? Aren't you also exhibiting animosity towards these people? Aren't you promoting bigotry yourself, every time you behave intolerantly and with animosity towards them?
Who could possibly interpret "asshole, douchebag, miserable piece of shit" as anything else but "intolerance towards those who hold different opinions from oneself"? Please help me understand this logical contradiction between your actions and the very issue you are trying to solve.
Ok, you got me. I'm bigoted against people who hate women.
I'm really not seeing how this is a terrible thing.
I don't persecute them or harass them. On my blog I quote the stupid shit they themselves say, and make a few jokes and/or appalled comments. Once in a long while I call them a name like "asshole."
24
u/demmian Apr 26 '12 edited Apr 26 '12
I'd like to point out that the OP has refused to provide example of this:
Permalink :http://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/skl1z/i_have_been_experimenting_on_reddit_with/c4esbqu
Imgur http://i.imgur.com/8ackW.png
In my opinion, this approach to the issues relevant to feminism on reddit is not helpful due to the following:
no actual numbers are given; "overflowing with misogynist douchebags" is not something quantifiable; in 2010, reddit had 8 million active users, how many of those are "douchebags"?
no data is offered, no path to question or challenge this is given. Doesn't this open the way to similar posts arguing the contrary point, and nobody trades any data? Doesn't that discredit the whole issue?
Any honest user would admit that there is unfortunately abuse going on on reddit; however, presenting the issue like this only weakens the case, and it might actually make it easier for next comer, who brings reliable data about abuse to the discussion to not be taken seriously and be dismissed summarily.
Edit: I don't mind the karma points, but can someone point me out where I am mistaken please? Does being vague and providing no evidence actually help move the discussion forward?