Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Comments
^Yeah, they weren't exactly vocal about them, but if someone asked, they pretty much said that they were okay with it, so...
Most of my bros seem to get their news from the Grauniad app. Don't know if that says something about their intelligence.
Also, Recommended Events is wonderful for finding parties/festivals/etc. that otherwise suck at promoting themselves through dead tree media, and Groups are greater for committee work because otherwise e-mail would turn into a revolting slowchat.
It's really what you make of it yourself.
This is how TV Tropes is for the most part (replacing the word "did" with "watched/read"). And probably reddit too, though I never really look at that site enough to say for sure.
When you mainly look at sources dedicated to finding the absolute worst examples you can possibly find on a site, it's going to seem like that stuff is a majority representation of the site. For example, I've seen some large collections of terrible, anti-feminist, rape-apologistic, victim-blaming crap posted on Facebook, and if I didn't see anything else it might be easy for me to believe that Facebook is full of misogynists.
Well, see, the difference with Reddit that makes it a special kind of bad is that the admins were aware that it was being used to distribute CP and were perfectly okay with it until there was a public outcry big enough that they had to reluctantly ban it to keep the site going.
I agree with you, and definitely think that Reddit's admins deserved the criticism they got for that. That doesn't preclude the majority of content on Reddit being mostly normal folks talking about normal, inane stuff.
"Mostly normal folks" are the ones who are the posting that stuff, by and large.
And that's another thing- the crap on Reddit isn't just a couple of problem users posting problematic content, they're userbase-wide things that pop up with uniform regularity, in an extremely wide variety of places.
Ok. As I said, I haven't looked at Reddit much myself, so I'll take your word for it.
The difference between scary creeper/racist/whatever shit showing up on Facebook, and the same stuff on TVT and Reddit, is that on Facebook you have your name attached to it and it immediately bites you in the ass because people call you out on it, employers look you up and see it and don't hire you, and generally it becomes pretty clear that real society and real people won't put up with your shit (at least not without burning a hell of a lot of bridges). On an anonymous site, it's much easier to find insular cliques of other bad eggs, and the problem perpetuates.
Or look you up, find out that your page is private, and ask for your password!
Meh. I'd guess that a large portion of people who are already stupid enough to post horrifically racist etc. stuff under their own name probably aren't managing their privacy settings properly anyway.
That, and I get the distinct impression ol' Zucker would take all of two seconds to sell a company access to a private profile.
The flipside of that, Bee, is that it assumes employers only fire for things like racism, and not, say, because the person is transgender.
Oh god, now he's posting lectures by Sam Harris.
It could be worse, Myrmidon, he could be posting about how Obama isn't born in the United States.
My cousin used to do that.
Well, the answer to your question lies within the "I" in the second sentence, I guess.
The answer is that they're not really concerned about his place of birth. They're concerned that he's black.
I find the stuff showing up on Facebook scarier, honestly, because of the lack of anonymity. It shows that stuff like that is still acceptable enough in society that people are willing to attach their names to it.
Sadly enough, there is probably very little (outside of admitting that you like Lolicon anime) that you can say without getting banned on TV Tropes that would get you fired in real life, at least in the states. We have a long way to go before our country can even get close to claiming to be post-racist and post-sexist. Some of the worst opinions you see there are probably shared by a lot of people in the management fields in our country, which is why it's such an uphill battle to achieve equal opportunity in the workplace.
Elbeem - I dunno, maybe not individual comments, but I think someone who spent his day at work delivering some of the opinions Rottweiler used to spout on a regular basis would get in trouble pretty quickly. However, it may be someone like that wouldn't stand out so much in the US.
Which is a frightening thought in itself.
Oh if they were ranting about stuff like that while at work, sure. I was just going off the hypothetical "boss has found some comments on Facebook".
Most of Rottweilers problem comments were islamaphobic, homophobic, and anti-feminist. Sadly enough, I'd wager that a huge percentage of the population in the U.S. meets one or more of those criteria, enough that a boss coming across a comment that met one of those criteria would be fairly likely to just shrug their shoulders and move on (or worse, agree whole-heartedly.)
As I said before, it's not necessarily the existence of these kinds of comments on the internet that disturb me. It's the fact that they are so representative of real things that real people think where I live.
I'd think a boss might be more concerned that he's on Facebook in company time, to be pessimistic.
^ "I am concerned at your use of Facebook on company time."
LIKE A BOSS.
About reddit:
There's always at least one asshole who posts something like that but the reaction varies pretty wildly between subreddits and even between threads on the same subreddit. You can get away with way more in r/gaming than in TwoX.
There was one thread on r/AdviceAnimals where people were getting upvoted into the thousands for explaining why a sexist meme was sexist and there have been plenty of others which are just crowds of assholes upvoting each other.
*snrk* TwoX not being full of sexists
Yay, rape discussions on Facebook.
A female friend of mine (we'll call her J) posted this as her status message:
> J (translated): I am fascinated by women who organize anti-rape protests because they consider being fucked by somebody while dead drunk to be rape.
Her American friend, N, is quick to post a comment. The discussion continues in English.
> N: !?
> J: aaand I guess N doesn't share my opinion
> N: not in the least my dear
> J: But how can you not blame it on reckless drinking and blame horny men instead? It's not okay to get drunk and hit on somebody and play victim afterwards. People are responsible for their choices, including choosing to have sex or not, drunk or sober
> N: getting drunk and taking advantage of a drunk woman are two totally different types of choices. and victim-blaming is incredibly unhelpful, particularly in regards to a crime such as rape or sexual assault. i am confused as to why we should forgive 'horny' men (rape is a crime of entitlement and dominance, not sexual urges) and blame women who have been taken advantage of (because i am sure you or your friends enjoy getting drunk every once in a while and don't think people should hold that against you), not to mention put down the efforts of those who organize anti-rape protests or demonstrations as it is a pressing and dangerous problem not just for women, but men and children as well. would you blame your friend/relative/partner if they were assaulted while drunk? would you like someone to blame you if you were violated? do you see all drunk people as equal criminals to rapists?
> J: I don't think you see my point... Rape is one the most horrific things that can happen to a woman (or anyone else for that matter). No rape victims should ever be blamed or said they were asking for it. I just tend to separate a real assault from what could most likely be viewed as consensual sex with a few drinks in between. I'm aware that if someone is intoxicated they cannot legally consent to sex, but how can a man know if a woman has consumed alcohol before getting sexually involved with him or if she's simply a bit on the slutty side? Ofcourse, when you see someone absolutely trashed and not even able to talk properly, it's evident they're not able to make common sense decisions and that should be very clear. An assault is a completely different thing, and of course, rapists could never come equal to drunk people who are prone to bad decisions when drunk.
> N: "a bit on the slutty side" (which i honestly do not know what you mean here. who defines slut? is a sexually active woman a slut? a woman who has sex outside of relationships? a woman wearing a short skirt? does being a 'slut' really matter? i would say no) is no excuse for forced sex, alcohol or not. i think that any thinking person who has actual concern for the well-being of others would be able to tell at some point in the interaction whether or not it is ok. a 'horny' man is no excuse, and having been raped is not a 'bad decision'. but even if two people were to say, have consensual sex after drinking and regret it the next morning, would this completely invalidate an anti-rape protest? are the personal sexual assault histories or lack thereof of organizers more important than the message?
I am kind of curious about the legal question of "what happens if both parties are considered too drunk to consent?" though.
I hope it's to be continued.