Psycho-Babble Administration | about the operation of this site | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Lou's request for consideration-defvasm

Posted by Lou Pilder on August 5, 2008, at 17:52:05

In reply to Re: Lou's reply to 10derHeart-gwzptduck?, posted by Dena on July 21, 2008, at 20:42:45

> So, did anyone else click on Lou's link, and read that previous thread, from 2005?
> I was flabbergasted by what I read there...!
> I wasn't active here then (I started posting in 2001 or 2002, but got tired of the lack of freedom to speak, and left around 2004), so I was unfamiliar with what occurred then... but whew!
> Here's the deal: It was brought to Dr. Bob's attention that a poster was making racial slurs, specifically about Jews. I'm not Jewish, but they made ME cringe. It took a good long while, and much protest from various posters for Dr. Bob to check it out. He said he didn't want to censor it because it was a "grey area" (he said that since the poster had been victimized in hhis past, he didn't want to discourage him from expressing himself). Excuse me? Someone speaks out hostile comments about an entire ethnic group, due to their negative experiences with a few from that group, and that's a "grey area"...?
> Dr. Bob claimed that he didn't know where to draw the line. Again, that doesn't pass the staight-face test, given his stated penchant for wanting to put out a spark before it becomes a forest fire. It's wholly and completely inconsistent with how he's jumped on others -- immediately -- for making similar (& even more mild) comments about other ethnic/religious groups. As he should -- but why the inconsistency?
> According to Dr. Bob's own rules, anything which may lead to others feeling put down, needs to be censored. I'm sorry, but "money-grubbing Jews" (which was the mildest of the poster's defamations) definitely crosses the line into what *MAY* lead others to feel put down...!
> There was then a public outcry, from those who are Jewish as well as those who are not, protesting Dr. Bob's (utter lack of a) ruling in this situation.
> What completely shocked me, is how it took nearly 3 long weeks for Dr. Bob to finally see that what the poster had written was indeed racist (in this case, anti-Semitic). Why so long? Why did it take Dr. Bob so long to see what was so blatantly clear to the rest of us? What sort of a precedent does that set here? In my opinion, Dr. Bob's way-slow sanction was a case of "too little, too late" ... and damage could not be undone.
> Now, to be honest, I've thought for a while that perhaps Lou was exaggerating about his claims of anti-Semitism. I'm a woman, and I know I can certainly be hyper-sensitive to perceived misogyny -- IOW, I can see it even where it's not intended, due to a lifetime of having been put down, squelched, ignored, and patronized, due to my gender.
> HOWEVER, this is blatant...! People had to talk Dr. Bob into seeing what should have been plain to him. I now see what Lou has been talking about -- it's there. I'm not saying that only anti-Semitism has been glossed over -- likely individuals of various ethnic/religious groups will be more sensitive than those who are not in their groups, about seeing slights stated against them. I'm sure that other forms of racism, sexism and anti-isms have been uttered, with even a few managing to sneak past the deputies and Dr. Bob.
> Is the anti-Semitism being allowed (or not directly delt with soon enough) because Lou is the most prolific protester against it...? Is it because some do not care for his posting style, and requests for clarification, and so his posts are thus discounted?
> Even if there were no Jewish members of this board, such ethnic slurs should not be allowed, much less declared a "grey area" and shruggged off!
> If it happened then, due to some underlying issue, then it's likely still happening now. It's wrong, it needs to be exposed, examined, and set right.
> Shalom, Dena
> "The unanswered questions aren't nearly as dangerous as the
> unquestioned answers."
> "We turn to God for help when our foundations are shaking only to
> learn that it is God shaking them." - Charles West
> "Naked is having no clothes on. Nekkid is having no clothes on and
> being up to something."
> "Our truth, when it becomes the ONLY truth, ceases to be truth."
> "While we're not fearful of tasting new things, we don't necessarily
> swallow all that we taste."
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If you are considering responding here in this thread, I am requesting that you click on the offered link to a thread. I think that if you examine the tread that there could be helpful infomation that IMO could be of such to have a better understanding of the issues in this thread.




Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post

Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.


Start a new thread

Google www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Administration | Framed

poster:Lou Pilder thread:306703