Some days I’m very capable of having civil discussions with people I disagree with, even when they say ignorant/oblivious/insensitive/false things. I really like to think that most of the time I try to engage people and at least understand them, even if I’m not likely to change my mind. But sometimes I have moments or phases where I’m fed up with all the bullshit and become very hostile (I bet Grayson can relate). This week falls under the latter category.
A thread on Will Hinton’s blog has spiraled out of control in no small part because I just can’t bring myself to quit calling bullshit on one commenter, who keeps responding with more bullshit. It’s childish and a complete waste of time (and probably burning a few bridges in the process) to even engage this person, whose idea of making an argument is to spam the thread with the first ten links that pop up in Google. And yet, I still do. Heat generating more energy than light, and all that.
On Peach Pundit, I used the word “bullshit” five times in two comments on one thread. There’s no question that that person totally deserved the hostility, though, because he’s a retarded partisan hack.
So, I’ll move back to thinking about the Will Hinton thread I mentioned. It was a book review of Pornified: How Pornography Is Damaging Our Lives, Our Relationships, and Our Families (whose second edition changed “Damaging” to “Transforming” “Transforming” to “Damaging”). Let’s back up to the beginning. Near the end of the post in question, the reviewer Expat Teacher writes: “We should treat porn as we do smoking. Lots of naming and shaming combined with public service announcements that show the downside of porn usage.”
There are a few ways to react to that. My first instinct was to say “Fuck you, Expat Teacher. Who the fuck are you to define morality for me?” (this is the same whack job who wrote a post saying meritocracy is flawed, and that only good people should be allowed to succeed) My next instinct was to try to address it in as calm and charitable way as possible. Due to my current temperament, what resulted was something in-between that took less of a bareknuckle approach than “fuck you, you judgmental prick,” but was still oozing with contempt.
Part of what bugs me is that site is promoted as a forum for competing ideas, and not as a bunch of right-wing white dudes patting each other on the back. Yet, when people with competing ideas show up even with the best intentions and on their best behavior (not talking about today), they’re accused (by the moderator, no less) of being dogmatic or instigating flame wars.
Moving away from that momentarily, I’ve been thinking about some things Elizabeth Edwards said at ConvergeSouth. She is really high on political communication on the Internet. Unfortunately, her mic wasn’t wired correctly, so I don’t have a podcast of exactly what she said to reference. But the gist of it, if I’m remembering correctly, was she thinks the Internet is a spectacular place for people to get together and debate ideas. She bases this on her experience with her husband’s political campaigns and on her experience with basketball and breast cancer support forums.
Well, I disagree with her. I think the Internet is usually an awful place to try to debate competing ideas. Even if something resembling a charitable conversation is sustainable for a while, it’ll go to shit eventually. You can put a timer on and wait for the bomb to go off.
Can’t say that I’m sure where I’m going with that, so I’ll just move on for now and perhaps clarify tomorrow.
If this were a morality play going through the paces in a mainstream media cycle, this would be the part where I’d be apologizing for lobbing the first bomb in this case. Oh, I was so harsh, boo hoo, I’m reformed now, if I flog myself enough will you forgive me? But it’s not, and I’m not. That post and everything that followed it was complete bullshit, and it is asking a lot out of anyone to be charitable in the face of such a wretched and insulting pile of shit.
I guess if there’s a point to be made to Will or to anyone else at this hour where the paragraphs aren’t flowing together as well as I’d like, it’s that people shouldn’t confuse civility with capitulation. If I see bullshit, I’m going to call it. And you shouldn’t act surprised or hurt if that’s what happens.






Rusty: you have the wrong idea if you think all the contributors/commentors/etc on my blog are a bunch of right-wing white guys. In fact, both Expat and gurufrisbee that you have been arguing with about porn are left-wing Democrats.
Actually, the first edition of Pornified had “transforming” in the subtitle and the second edition had “damaging” (as mentioned here).
And I don’t think you have anything to apologize for… those people have been absolutely ridiculous, and if they think sticking their fingers in their ears and going “LALALALA I CAN’T HEAR YOU!!” consitutes a good argument, well, what is to be done?
And Will? I have just as much of a problem with self-avowed “left-wing Democrats” as I do with right-wingers - sometimes more of a problem, because of all the hypocrisy. People who claim to be progressive end up regurgitating the same entrenced classism, racism, sexism, and all the rest of it. It’s sickening. I see it all time time among white middle/upper class men who think they’re “progressive.” But it’s always interesting how quickly the mask comes off.
And he may very well be. Just saying that the dude’s views on The Monolith Porn sound basically the same as most right wingers’, so that doesn’t really qualify as diversity of opinion on the topic even if he’s a card-carrying Democrat.
Wait, was that comment addressed to me or Will? I’m confused.
Sorry, a little crossfire there. That was meant for Will.
Will, if you are reading this thread anymore: did you delete some of the comments on the thread at your site? Or is your blog software messing up?
It’s an insensitive remark, but back in the day some folks I knew used to say, “Arguing on the Internet is like competing in the special olympics. Even if you win, you’re still retarted.”
Yeah, Joe, you’re right. I thought I had learned that lesson, but apparently I haven’t.
I don’t agree with that, but I guess I’m overly optimistic.
I tried to review the thread you’re referring to but couldn’t get to it. So, I’ll just comment anyway.
I have long thought that the internet could be a good medium for debating competing ideas. Emphasis on “could” because it hasn’t been yet, isn’t now and doesn’t seem to be moving in that direction. With a few exceptions, current online political discourse tends to be like cocktail parties - you mix with the people with whom you agree just like you party with the people you like.
As for the porn smoking analogy - that’s just bullshit. If you don’t like porn, then don’t read it, view it, listen to it, or whatever. If you’re worried about your children being exposed to pornography then skip the tennis lesson, shopping expedition, caribbean vacation, golf outing and lunch with the girls and spend that time with your children. If your children are so weak-spirited that they can be influenced by a little bit of porn, then, well, you should have skipped all that tennis, travel, golf, and shopping back when the child was younger.
Personally, I think the Bible and the religions organized around it are like smoking - “We should treat the Bible as we do smoking. Lots of naming and shaming combined with public service announcements that show the downside of Bible usage.â€Â
Enough ranting for me today.
I felt that way about “Bible usage” for a long time, and often still do. But people like RootieToot give me hope.
Haha… I often feel that way. But really, I think Christianity would be okay without the Christians.
I simply do not understand why people feel like they should have the right to prevent, limit or in any way negatively affect OTHER people’s porn usage. Don’t do it if you don’t like it, and ignore the rest of us who do. Why is that difficult to grasp?
BUT DEMOCARTS R SOCIALIST 2 LOL I TOTALLY MISS TEH POINT U MAEK!!1!1!!!1eleven
Jesus Fucksocks. How you manage to do these I Blog and I Also Go Out in Public things without going werewolf on someone is beyond me. I sure as hell couldn’t do it.
Porn : Smoking?
Then I suppose we can look forward to co-workers slinking off in the mid-morning, ducking out the door to shiver in the cold for their much-needed porn break.
But then, you’d have to consider the real danger that porn would present even to those who don’t partake. That’s right. I’m talking about second-hand porn. Just imagine …
Citizen: Excuse me, sir. Is it your intention to peruse your porn right here? My family and I are trying to enjoy our lovely dinner, and …
Porn Addict: Yes. (Proceeds to fan lewdness flagrantly in the family’s direction.)
I’m really glad you didn’t go with the easy collateral-damage-from-flying-splooge image there.
I mean, no, no one should have to breathe in your second hand smoke. And no one should have to look at your dick if they don’t want to. That’s why it’s rude to smoke on people or show them your dick without being invited. You don’t have to legislate that. It’s common fucking sense. But it’s no reason to stop people from consuming cigarettes or porn in the privacy of their own homes.
Oh and about Peach Pundit… they can lick my dirty asshole. I mean, I already thought that - had for months, actually - but then I saw the way those fools were carrying on in the thread about the prostitutes arrested in Gwinnett County. You can imagine… it’s standard-issue, really. “She looks like a man!” “Why can’t we see their bodies!” Har har har they are so ugly and that is so funny and blahbeddyblahblargh!!!
/rant over (for now)