Based on a previous... discussion

[cinnabonbon]

Inspired by the awful discussion we had earlier. I know I'm probably digging my grave but it bothered me. :/

I was wondering how people would read the situation if the main person is someone they respect. Like for example:

We have a soldier. He loses a leg in a bomb raid during a war. It changes his life forever. After months of therapy, he comes home to a group of his equals. People he respects, friends and allies. In that group, he hears someone say "I love war movies! They're great! But I love the realistic clips I find online even more. I don't know if they're real or not but eh who cares - I especially love it when you can see their limbs get blown off in explosions. Soooo hot. It makes me want to reach for the baby oil and tissue if you know what I mean."

Now, our soldier is gutted by this, because he has been in a real war and the glamour of war has been stripped away for his mind. He's also shocked that someone would use his type of injury as a source of entertainment after he's been in a war, - as if it's all good fun and no one gets hurt. Worse, it's being used as masturbation fodder. So he tells him to knock it off, because it's disrespectful.

Today's big question is:
Should the fan apologize to the soldier for the gross indiscretion, or should he argue with him about whether or not he has the right to be offended?

Most people would choose the first option. However, if we change

-the gender of the soldier
-the tool of war from 'bombs' to 'rape'

it seems like people change their minds, even here on DU. Why is that?

[Squinch]

1. I think most people would agree with you

before you change "rape" to "bombs."

There is a small subset of the population that confuses felonies with free speech. Here on DU, if you notice, you will see that it tends to be the same few names.

[cinnabonbon]

2. That would restore some of my faith in humanity

It makes me sad that there's a small subset of those people here. But I suppose there's always a few of them in every group.

[Squinch]

3. I have seen a number of posters who come in here and see these discussions,

and who say their opinions have changed as a result of the discussions. When people say that, their opinions always seem to change to the more pro-women position. I don't recall any saying they have changed their minds to be more conservative, more anti-feminist.

So maybe these discussions serve a purpose.

[cinnabonbon]

4. True. And despite how ugly some of the conversation get-

-I've seen people become more pro-women after it. Not a lot, but enough.

I agree with you. The most important part is not to be silent about it, because who knows who reads these boards. Even if the conversations are uncomfortable in the beginning, I like to think of that as growing pains. In the end, you are a bigger person than what you were when you began discussing it, and some silent reader may have had a lightbulb light up over their head because of it.

[Squinch]

6. To a point. I do take BB's point about some posters just being around to stir mud. Those

I won't engage with. But there are a few who can engage in an actual discussion, and that, after all is why we are all here. My feeling is, you don't have to agree with me, but you do have to discuss and not just be tossing some football full of bullshit or nastiness.

[cinnabonbon]

8. How can you tell the difference?

I'm worried I will fall for a trollbait without realizing it is one. I guess I will find out soon enough.

But yes, having a good, thought-provoking discussion between two people who respect each other even though they're not necessarily agreeing is a wonderful feeling. I would die happy if I got more of that. I think that the conversation can get heated sometimes simply because it's hard to separate the personal side of things when one talks about issues that affect you negatively. Does that make any sense?

[Squinch]

10. You can tell. It usually entails some personal insult, some statement of

"I'm sure you believe X" from someone who has no idea what you believe. Or it includes any of the tactics listed in this OP: http://www.democraticunderground.com/125532659.

After a short time, those types become tediously predictable.

If a poster veers off into one of these tactics, and you point it out and they come back and discuss the actual issue, it's worth it. If they just keep veering, you know they were never going to have anything to communicate in the first place.

[cinnabonbon]

13. That sounds like pretty sound advice. Thanks. :) I never liked arguing a strawmen anyway.

Ahh, got it. Thank you for the link, also! I checked that post earlier and that list is ever so useful. Kind of like the MRA bingo card.

[xulamaude]

11. "I'm worried I will fall for a trollbait"

Didn't you say you'd been reading here for a while?

They're pretty easy to spot.

[cinnabonbon]

12. I have! But

I honestly have trouble seeing when people are clueless or doing it on purpose.

Unless they use words like "females" or "feminazi" in their posts, because then it gets pretty blatant. But those are more prevalent on other sites, I think?

But in any case, I will take your word for it. I am sure they're easier to spot than I think, I just overthink things.

[xulamaude]

14. "clueless or doing it on purpose"

Does it matter?

If you are looking to 'educate the silent' then you already know that is what you are doing.

[cinnabonbon]

15. of course it matters.

Maybe I wasn't clear, but that's not my main goal. I am not a teacher.

I'd prefer to have a good, eye-opening discussion with the person I am speaking with. If the silent readers understand what I mean and learn something from it, that is great, but without human interaction and exchanges of ideas, my time on DU will get pretty dull pretty fast.

[xulamaude]

16. You seem perfectly clear to me.

DU is (as I'm sure you've noticed) not exactly the best place for feminists to have "human interaction" with anti-feminists.

Dull is in the eye of the beholder. No one is keeping you here.

[redqueen]

18. Learning by experience is the way I've done it.

And sometimes I will still respond to what seems like a genuine attempt at discussion from someone I've previously got the vibe from that they're just someone I should ignore.

Over time you'll realize who's interested in an exchange of ideas, and who's just looking to make wisecracks and pull the MRA stunts as shown in that OP ismnotwasm posted earlier. After enough of that kind of stuff I just put them on full ignore, it's not worth the distraction from genuine conversation.

[xulamaude]

19. Excellent advice, especially this:

Over time you'll realize who's interested in an exchange of ideas, and who's just looking to make wisecracks and pull the MRA stunts

[intaglio]

5. My opinions changed regarding Assange

I was an assdonkey.

[Squinch]

7. NEVER an assdonkey!

Rather, a learning person.

[cinnabonbon]

9. Haha assdonkey

I'm glad to hear that.

[Tumbulu]

17. Good post and point

I have come to the conclusion that it is primarily a rather small group of vociferous nuts who always jump in on these threads defending their "rights" over anyone else's. I see them doing the same in other areas also. Am wondering if this new 5 posts hidden rule is for them.....

[smirkymonkey]

20. Thanks for your thoghtful post.

I am so glad that you have finally decided to chime in because you have some very interesting insights. Welcome to the group!