|
GreyjoyBastard posted:i'm in a position where i get irritated with most reade skeptics and everyone who seeks to weaponize her accusations against bidenlikers This is largely identical to my position.
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2021 23:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 09:08 |
|
|
Hey, this thread has honestly lasted a long longer than I thought it would, and has largely been more productive that I predicted. That said, I think the thread's central focus on Tara Reade's case is causing some stagnation, and I think that it's time for the thread to get rebooted and expanded. If you are interested in writing or contributing to the OP of a new Rape Culture/#metoo thread, PM me. We haven't decided if this thread will remain closed for the entire interim, but the topic does have a place in D&D and it will return soon.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2021 03:18
|
|
|
I haven't heard from anyone yet, so to be clear, I'm looking for a few write-ups: "what is rape culture?", "a brief history of #metoo", and "here's a list of useful sources for further questions". I want it to be clear that, while a lot of the conversation is going to focus on the crimes of famous people, we should keep in mind that those crimes are a manifestation of a larger cultural issue, and let that inform discussion.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2021 15:42
|
|
|
OK, as per discussion in QCS, this thread will be reopening as a general rape culture and metoo thread. It has been closed almost a week now, so please leave behind any non-productive conversations and make an effort to have a respectful and earnest discussion about this extremely serious issue. In particular, the mods will be looking for quality posts on rape culture, metoo, and the contexts that both exist in, and we'll be giving out free avatar changes to people who write them. We'd also like to see reposts of older posts in this thread that you think are interesting or informative. We're going to try to put together a compilation of good posts and useful resources to help with discussion. Remember, famous people aren't the only incarnations of rape culture, it's important to discuss how these issue affect people in every social strata. Please discuss respectful, and remember that even if people haven't shared their stories, they may be victims themselves or be close to people who have been.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2021 00:10
|
|
|
doverhog posted:Isn't this thread really about how both parties are bought and paid for by donors, and will do anything to maintain the status quo. They will virtue signal, but taking actual action requires permission from the billionaires that own them. Not really. Politicians and famous people often get away with it because of their wealth and influence, but in cases affecting poor people, abusers tend to get away with it because nobody with any authority actually gives a poo poo about the accusations and even if they do, they can expect to encounter the same sort legal and cultural barriers that people accusing famous individuals do on a smaller scale. It's a widespread issue and focusing exclusively on politicians or the rich does it a disservice.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2021 01:43
|
|
|
some plague rats posted:Okay but the thread is naturally going to focus on them because a) they have power over millions of people and huge media coverage and b) you're probably not as part of your day to day life going to run into supporters of anyone who's assaulted me. None of them are running for president. (inshallah) Yeah naturally people are going to talk about cases they've heard about. It's still important to keep in mind that it doesn't spring from the aether.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2021 02:09
|
|
|
The onus for establishing justice in the cases of abusive artists (of other abusive entrepreneurs) falls on institutional powers, not the consumption habits of individuals and certainly not individual aesthetic sense or art appreciation. The line is more blurred when it's a news or awards organization, who do have an obligation to not whitewash artists by ignoring abusive behavior.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2021 14:02
|
|
|
ram dass in hell posted:Ok? It's not a question of onus, if, as Yinlock said, I can't hear a Bowie or Marilyn Manson song that I used to like, for example, without immediately thinking of the terrible things they did. It's not that I think I'm not 'supposed to' enjoy these things anymore, it's that I know the voice I'm hearing is the voice of someone who did awful things to people. I don't understand how other people don't have the same revulsion and instead are like woo ground control to major tom for the 50,000th time, but it's not because I'm saying the "onus" is on you not to listen, I'm just baffled at how you don't seem to understand the revulsion. If I saw a painting and liked it and then found out it was an original George W Bush I would probably like the painting a lot less, immediately, because of the artist and the type of person they are and the things they've done and did. I understand the revulsion and if avoiding the works of an abuser makes you more comfortable, then I support your doing so. I know that works have been ruined for me when I realized the extent to which the creators' lovely politics or personal behaviors are reflected in it. My point is more that the rejection of art by abusive artists is a personal or interpersonal one, rather than an ethical obligation to avoid consuming it, which is a fairly common position in my experience.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2021 18:47
|
|
|
If you would prefer to yell about things happening rather than learning and understanding why they happened I suggest you do so in a different subforum.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2021 22:20
|
|
|
silicone thrills posted:What about learning and yelling at the same time? A compromise. I'm not asking people to not be angry. I'm angry about the decision. I want people to not take it out on posters trying to explain why it happened.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2021 22:22
|
|
|
Yeah those probes weren't necessary, I'll ask Ralph to lay off a bit on people venting in this thread.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2021 16:22
|
|
|
I imagine it would be pretty difficult to find jurors who don't already have a strongly held opinion on Cosby's conviction, and a lot of them would probably have heard the information that would have to be excluded since the case got so much coverage. Like clearly in the interest of justice the case should have gone to a retrial but I genuinely don't know how the court system does or should deal with that kind of thing.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2021 04:34
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:yeah I guess you're right, it was annoying to get a probe message like "explaining the decision isn't defending it" only for a mod to jump in and start explicitly defending the decision as a victory for defendants' rights. This is an entirely made up reading of my post.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2021 02:26
|
|
|
Stop sniping at each other.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2021 17:07
|
|
|
I feel like this is getting far afield from the actual thread topic. I hope everyone agrees that the court system is biased for both structural and social reasons in favor of both the wealthy and rapists, but please try to refocus the discussion on how those issues intersect with Cosby's case (or at least similar cases).
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2021 19:44
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:Good (and infuriating example) of street harassment: Jesus christ. It still just blows me away that people act his way towards anyone, much less random strangers on the street.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2021 15:29
|
|
|
Hey, thanks to all parties for resolving this conflict maturely!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2021 17:59
|
|
|
silicone thrills posted:It's cool, lets just pigeon hole the whole conversation to a thread with less than 30 regular readers because the idea of talking about this in a popular and active thread is uncouth. Yinlock posted:The Fantasy must be maintained at all costs. Mellow Seas posted:USNews probably has what, 40 regular readers? We're not talking orders of magnitude, here. Stop
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2021 19:38
|
|
|
This thread is going to be closed for a couple hours until I can come and clean house.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2021 22:54
|
|
|
It is acceptable to ask for better sources to confirm allegations, it is not acceptable to outright dismiss allegations of sexual abuse without extremely strong evidence. The ideological leanings of the source are not such evidence. Of course a politician's enemies are going to amplify allegations against them; it's beneficial for them to do so. That an ulterior motive exists is not evidence that the allegations are false, especially not when video evidence is provided. As such, Solkanar is banned from this thread and will have other penalties coming shortly. That said, it is unacceptable for posters, especially people who are not usually thread participants, to call other people rape apologists for asking for better sources. It's also not acceptable to run a riot in this thread because the mods haven't responded in the space of two hours. If you feel something absolutely needs immediate attention because it puts people at risk or similar, contact a mod via the discord link in the D&D rules thread. If it's an issue of ordinarily unacceptable posting, it can wait a few hours for attention.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2021 23:41
|
|
|
Jeff Fatwood posted:Why did you remove the Joe Biden avatars? I didn't, but I think that we probably shouldn't have slideshows of little girls being touched inappropriately all over the forums.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2021 23:50
|
|
|
Sedisp posted:The person who was being called a rape apologist quite literally looked through the original posts twitter handle specifically to compare the story to covid denial. I do not find that acceptable for any thread much less here. That poster has been banned from this thread and has other actions waiting in the queue, as stated. I'm referring to other posters expressing a desire for a better source. goethe.cx posted:So to be clear, it’s the D&D mods’ position that Gateway Pundit, Stormfront, covid denialists, et al are acceptable sources to post? There's a difference between a source being bad, and an individual claim on a different topic from a bad source that provides video evidence that can also sourced elsewhere being regarded as false with no further counter-evidence provided. fool of sound fucked around with this message at 00:05 on Aug 8, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2021 23:59
|
|
|
Cranappleberry posted:It sure seems like any time anyone creates a charity, NGO or centralized organization from a grassroots movement it's a deliberate effort to scam people or appropriate the movement into helping the powerful. That's an inbuilt ruling class defense mechanism. Movements need ruling class endorsements and patronage for legitimacy, but in the process of attracting and incorporating members of the ruling class, the movement also incorporates their class interests. Time's Up is exactly that for the wider MeToo movement.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2021 19:48
|
|
|
bobjr posted:Are there any legal advantages to resigning instead of getting impeached? I saw someone said if he resigned he could run again, but I really doubt that would go over well. There's an unspoken rule in... most leadership positions but especially politics, where resignation leads to less severe or no further consequences. In theory, the utility here is to encourage people to resign rather than cause a bunch of damage to a government or organization by fighting till the end, but it also exists just because it lets wealthy and influential people avoid consequences.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2021 20:24
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:The repulsive aspect is Abedin dropping the story as part of her effort to sell her "memoir," Hey, isn't accusing a victim of telling their story for financial gain one of the things that we were explicitly asked to crack down hard on? How do you feel this case if different?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2021 00:55
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:I apologized for casting aspersions on her motives; I don't recall being a part of the convo about "accusing a victim of telling their story for financial gain." I see the apology, and I'm not going to punish it at this point, but a post accusing Reade of giving her Russia Today interview for financial gain is oft-cited as an example of severe mis-moderation on this topic, so I felt that it needed to be addressed.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2021 01:04
|
|
|
sexpig by night posted:do you feel there's a reasonable difference between 'I bet this lady's lying to get all that totally real money that just showers on prominent rape victims' and 'it's kinda hosed up she's treating a serious accusation of sexual assault as a teaser for her book'? I don't really see how it's meaningfully different from accusing Reade of going public in order to later sell her book, unless the supposition is that a survivor has to name their abuser for their story to be valid.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2021 01:13
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:One is saying "I do not believe her accusations because she is making them to make money" and the other is "I believe her accusations but I think it's wrong/weird/unacceptable to make money from them". Ok, fair point actually. I'll drop the issue.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2021 01:20
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 09:08 |
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:This was one of the many reasons that we were pleased when we were told that there'd be an IK named for this thread after it was closed several months ago, before that never happened. Sorry about this. The admins have decided that for the most part they no longer want IKs to serve as mini-mods for serious threads.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2021 16:11
|
|