~ archived since 2018 ~

I love how calmly pointing out that you aren't a victim everywhere you turn automatically makes me a misogynist.... and they wonder why they take so much shit....

zellyman

August 23, 2011

6 upvotes

/r/MensRights

http://www.reddit.com/r/metanarchism/comments/jqzt7/yet_again_attempted_rabblerousing_from_the_good/c2efh9y

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	I love how calmly pointing out that you aren't a victim everywhere you turn automatically makes me a misogynist.... and they wonder why they take so much shit....
Author	zellyman
Upvotes	6
Comments	28
Date	August 23, 2011 1:23 AM UTC (14 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/jr708/i_love_how_calmly_pointing_out_that_you_arent_a/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/i-love-how-calmly-pointing-out-that-you-arent-a.1035592 https://theredarchive.com/post/1035592

Comments

[–]hardwarequestions 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]zarquon989 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]tomek77 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]zellyman 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]enkidusfriend 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MResponse 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (49 children) | Copy Link

[–]zarquon989 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (48 children) | Copy Link

[–]MResponse -4 points-3 points-2 points 14 years ago (47 children) | Copy Link

[–]zellyman 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I know you probably don't realize this, but one of the reasons /AMR was initially formed was because of this subreddit's many forays into other subreddits.

That is what they say, but it seems a poor rationalization to me. r/shitredditsays and r/worstof (and r/bestof) do nothing but "foray into other subreddits", and has done so since long before r/mr, but r/anarchism-mods don't complain about that, do they?

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, they say. Well, is seems one group's "downvote squad" is another group's "perfectly reasonable link to viewpoints which need to be confronted".

I don't mind inbound links. I mind the self-righteous hypocrisy of denouncing downvote squads while going berserk with them youself.

(BTW, the story of r/amr's creation is not honestly presented. Just the day before that reddit created, I and one of the resident women MRAs had a discussion with thepinkmask, right here on r/mr, on the topic of whether it is morally defensible or wise of transsexuals to have sex with people who do not want to have sex with transsexuals. This was probably due to an inbound link/downvote call from a subreddit where tpm was mod. Anyway, tmp tilted on us for disagreeing with her, and very shortly after she and Nebula42 created r/amr.)

[–]MResponse -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

r/shitredditsays

1,195 readers or less than 5% of this subreddit.

r/worstof

10,327 readers or 41% of this subreddit. I would say this subreddit is worthy of more criticism, but at least they don't try to bring a specific ideology.

and has done so since long before r/mr, but r/anarchism-mods don't complain about that, do they?

That's a red herring; if you have a problem with those groups, dedicate your attention to going after those groups. In the case of the former, they already do have someone trying to stop them.

Well, is seems one group's "downvote squad" is another group's "perfectly reasonable link to viewpoints which need to be confronted".

And of course those here try to frame it that way. At least do a self post instead of directing users to another subreddit, especially when the size of your subreddit easily makes the other look small in comparison. This is, again, about respecting the integrity of other subreddits to have their own discussions, something MR has not respected.

I mind the self-righteous hypocrisy of denouncing downvote squads while going berserk with them youself.

Again, one of the reasons AMR was originally created was the downvote brigades. Would they stop because we suddenly stopped posting? No.

and very shortly after

Correlation is not causation. I would imagine that something like that was just the tip of the iceberg.

transsexuals

That is a subreddit of 665 readers, or about 3% as many as MR. I trust that they didn't greatly disrupt the order of things here, and that if you do have a problem with them, you will go after r/TransphobiaProject, not r/Anarchism because they share a moderator or a few.

[–]zarquon989 7 points8 points9 points 14 years ago (40 children) | Copy Link

[–]MResponse 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (38 children) | Copy Link

At least you're no longer trying to deny that they made r/amr.

I never said that. To say otherwise is intellectually dishonest EvilPundit.

The fact is, r/anarchism is an unrelated subreddit. If you were to moderate r/google and r/sharks, would it be fair for a group that hates sharks to attack r/google too just because it has a moderator in common?

r/@ no more "created" AMR than my keyboard wrote this post; without the action of individuals, there is nothing.

Talk about projection. Some individual members of r/mensrights visited other reddits.

"Visited" is a rather generous way of putting it. They downvoted posts and overwhelmed the existing conversation and replaced it with their own. It should come as no surprise that the mods had to take action to preserve the integrity of their subreddit.

And before you say, "they're just downvotes," imagine if there were a feminist subreddit with, say 33,595 (approximately the same ratio of users as you have to r/@) invaded this subreddit and replaced the existing conversation with their own feminist version of the MRA. Would you not be outraged? Would you not be one of the first ones to call for them to be banned in order to maintain the integrity of your subreddit?

They are the aggressors, and now they're trying to deny it.

All available evidence seems to say otherwise.

[–]zarquon989 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

[–]MResponse 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

I never said that r/@ created r/amr. I said that the moderators of r/@ created r/amr.

So what's the problem? Are the moderators not allowed to take independent action in creating AMR? You still haven't addressed the fact that r/@ and AMR are two separate entities.

The members of r/@ are victims of the modreators of r/@ - they don't support the mods but they can't remove them.

One only need look through your post history - either as zarquon989 or as EvilPundit - to see that you have played a large role in encouraging users here to go to r/@. Here, I'll post an example for you:

Don't even bother commenting on /amr. They'll just instaban you. Just take your complaints to r/anarchism and r/metanarchism, which are run by the people who created /amr.

It sounds an awful lot like the members of r/@ are victims of your vindictiveness.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]EvilPundit 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]MResponse -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]EvilPundit 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]maywest 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

No, no one would be outraged and calling for bans, that's what /amr does. Suggesting that /mr would attempt to have a sub reddit cease to exist is intellectually dishonest and is easily disprovable. You are again projecting /amr's ultimate goal to have /mr cease to exist.

No one is calling for /amr to banned in order to maintain the integrity of this sub-reddit. We realize that if we tried to get /amr banned we would lose integrity. There is however much discussion as to whether or not they should be engaged or ignored.

/amr can do neither, they refuse to actually engage anyone from /mr and they refuse to ignore /mr, they want /mr to cease to exist. You want /mr to cease to exist. You are projecting your wish to remove ideas that are opposed to yours onto your opponents and then calling them dishonest.

[–]MResponse 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago* (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]maywest 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

So if this subreddit were being overwhelmed with feminists under the guise of being MRAs trying to take over your movement, you seriously wouldn't call for the ban of a single one?

Of course not, that happened last week with all the shitty links and comments that were reposted to /amr, remember?

Of course it is, because I never said that.

I agree that I had misread your previous statement. I thought you were suggesting that /mr would call for the sub to be banned not the individual users. I, myself, don't see the difference between both of those actions from a moral standpoint as the end result of both is the removal of opposition, silencing of dissent, etc and I still take the same issue with you suggesting that calling for bans would be an /mr response as that is easily proven to not be the case.

Also not what I said. I would recommend re-reading my post.

I have re-read your post and noted my error. Let's continue.

Do you believe that /mr has a right to exist?

Who do you believe is more supportive of banning opposition /amr or /mr?

How come when individuals from /@,/meta@. and /feminisms do somehting they are individuals but when individuals from /mr do something they are /mr?

[–]MResponse 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

Of course not, that happened last week with all the shitty links and comments that were reposted to /amr, remember?

As has been pointed out before, AMR is a drop in the bucket compared to the size of MR. Furthermore, you seem to have overlooked part:

under the guise of being MRAs

We don't pretend to be MRAs because we're not MRAs. There's a difference between coming here and commenting, and those who go to r/@ just to stir up trouble.

MR also has it lucky in that you have a significant enough size to generally self-moderate. Not every subreddit is afforded this.

Not to mention the fact that, as I have already indicated, participants in AMR have been banned here.

I still take the same issue with you suggesting that calling for bans would be an /mr response as that is easily proven to not be the case.

And as I have said, it has been proven that this is the case. Moderators of AMR have, in fact, been banned in MR.

Do you believe that /mr has a right to exist?

Yes.

Who do you believe is more supportive of banning opposition /amr or /mr?

I believe that AMR does what it has to do in order to carry out its mission without being overrun by trolls. In fact, this link on MR went straight to a discussion between a generalizing troll and MRAs respond to them.

Again, your subreddit can afford to self-moderate through the users, but not every one can.

How come when individuals from /@,/meta@. and /feminisms do somehting they are individuals but when individuals from /mr do something they are /mr?

Individuals from r/@ who do something collectively are r/@. They are not r/AMR. Individuals who are from r/AMR who do something collectively are from r/AMR. And those from r/MR who do something collectively are r/MR.

EDIT: Proof of MR ban, without the user even posting here.

[–]maywest 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Of course not, that happened last week with all the shitty links and comments that were reposted to /amr, remember?

As has been pointed out before, AMR is a drop in the bucket compared to the size of MR. Furthermore, you seem to be ignoring part: under the guise of being MRAs We don't pretend to be MRAs because we're not MRAs.

I was ignoring nothing, last week there were multiple trolls posting to /mr then reposting the troll post to /amr if you wish to ignore this that's your choice.

There's a difference between coming here and commenting, and those who go to r/@ just to stir up trouble.

You are swarming a sub reddit and derailing both it's discussion and utility. Do you agree?

There is a difference between commenting and adding to discussion and stirring up trouble/trolling. I was banned form /amr for commenting. No one is banned form /mr for commenting, most trolls aren't even banned. Your comments are intended to derail /mr threads you do not discuss the topic, you critique /mr. This is not the place for that. When you do it it is "coming here and commenting" when anyone from /mr does it it is "swarming a forum" and "trolling" they are both the same thing.

MR also has it lucky in that you have a significant enough size to generally self-moderate. Not every subreddit is afforded this.

Is that privilege? The fact that /mr has a large dedicated userbase who actively moderate it is because of the utility they gain from it, because this sub reddit is valuable to them and they want it to continue that utility. Not ANY sub reddit is afforded this it has to happen organically. Luck has nothing to do with it.

The problems, hate, and bullshit that exist in /@, /meta@, and /feminisms cannot reasonably be attributed to /mr as an entity. They are individuals who have ongoing disputes. The mods and monarchs of the aforementioned subs are confrontational with everyone who disagrees with them on any matter. They have more anger, dissent, and trolling directed at them from just /@ alone than from /mr and to argue otherwise is silly. There is no conspiracy, people who behave like idiots gets downvoted by people who don't like idiots.

Not to mention the fact that, as I have already indicated, participants in AMR have been banned here.

You have mentioned it twice now then ;-) "participants" is a nice way of putting it isn't it? I have no say in the banning or unbanning of people in this sub reddit. I do not support any bans besides obvious spammers. I will not argue in the defense of any ban.

I still take the same issue with you suggesting that calling for bans would be an /mr response as that is easily proven to not be the case.

And as I have said, it has been proven that this is the case. The moderators of AMR have, in fact, been banned in MR.

I do not support bans, you do. You argue that /amr does what it has to in order to carry out it's mission, how can you then logically and seriously argue against another sub reddit doing the same thing?

Do you believe that /mr has a right to exist?

Yes.

If you believe that /mr has a right to exist what exactly is it that you are attempting to achieve ?

Who do you believe is more supportive of banning opposition /amr or /mr?

I believe that AMR does what it has to do in order to carry out its mission without being overrun by trolls.

You did not answer the question.

In fact, this link on MR went straight to a discussion between a troll, who had said that ridiculous quote in order to rile up the MRAs.

Are you really going to point me to the /amr thread "/mr rapes a drunk girl" during this discussion? Really? okay, sorry, I can't follow what's going on in that thread at all anymore due to totalitarian moderation. I called that troll a troll at the time and don't understand how it can be used to support your current argument.

Again, your subreddit can afford to self-moderate through the users, but not every one can.

That's ridiculous. If people from those subs stopped being confrontational and antagonistic with everybody that disagrees with them there would be no problem, the fact that they are attempting to solve the problem by being even more hostile and agitating further proves that that is all they want to do.

How come when individuals from /@,/meta@. and /feminisms do somehting they are individuals but when individuals from /mr do something they are /mr?

Individuals from r/@ who do something collectively are r/@. They are not r/AMR. Individuals who are from r/AMR who do something collectively are from r/AMR.

Individuals from /@ collectively formed /amr and /amr exists to attack /mr

And those from r/MR who do something collectively are r/MR.

ah, yes the constant "downvote brigades" that we are constantly forming. There is no collective decision to downvote perceived idiocy, individuals perceive idiocy and they downvote it. No plan. No collective decision. Individuals. I don't see why you refuse to concede this point.

EDIT: [2] Proof of MR ban, without the user even posting here.

Lady Catherine posts here a lot.

[–]zellyman 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]maywest 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]MResponse 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]maywest 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link