You're free to assert that you know my own mind better than I do, in determining what concepts I do and don't have difficulty in grasping, though on the balance of probabilities I think it's unlikely that you actually do.
It's interesting that you've moved so quickly to replicate two of the meme's commonest weaknesses: steering a discussion from the impersonal (the question of whether it's 'unreasonable' to state that everyone who participates in the meme implicitly condones it) to the personal (whether it's 'reasonable' for the meme to lambast me for calling it a shoal of cunts'). And mis-interpretation, because at no point have I complained about the meme being offended by being described as 'cunts'. Indeed, I've said here and in my own blog that I welcome their offended comments, since they are tangible proof of the meme's hypocrisy. Nor did I suggest anywhere that the meme's 'eviscerating' of me was somehow worse than anything I've said about it in my own journal: why would you suggest that I did? To put it bluntly, your response here suggests that, like the meme, you're uncomfortable dealing with abstract concepts and verifiable substance, and happier when rebutting a debate point by falling back on a personal attack based on mis-representation of the facts.
Handwave or 'suspect' subjectively all you like, but the meme operates a double standard when it openly labels me a sexist and a misogynist because I use a female-derived slang term as an insult, but at the same time ignores and condones the widespread use of '[x term]-whore' as an insult (attention whore, grammar whore', etc). The meme rules state 'don't be sexist', but 'whore' is a sexist term that the meme collective 'you' are happy to use. Presumably, until someone criticising the meme uses it, at which point the 'sexist' slur will be deployed again, and the collective 'you' will once again choose to ignore the double standard.
As you've chosen to make this personal, let's be very clear about the personal element. I didn't launch some attack on the meme out of the blue. Some weeks ago, I queried a mod call there and, as a result of that discussion, was banned for harrassing the mods. The meme then, repeatedly, cited me by name in anon threads and branded me a troll and a racist (or at best, someone who absolutely equated negative comments about a TV show with racism). As I'm unable to respond there, I flagged the defamation in my own journal and responded with defamation of my own. Now, I understand that, while the meme loves its self-appointed role as the fandom police, scouring random journals in search of content to mock and deride, it is collectively far less happy when it is subjected to the same scrutiny and open mockery. But, to use your own terms, if the meme is going to dish it out to me, then I'll dish it back, every time. You apparently find this ridiculous of me, and that's your entitlement, just as I find it at the very least 'ridiculous', as well as offensive and hypocritical, for anyone to claim that the meme is, on the whole, a reasonable place whose members should not ever be collectively blamed when some of them behave offensively.
You are, however, the only person I've so far seen who's been willing to argue on behalf of the meme's collective reasonableness in a public post with your own lj-name attached. Responses in my own blog have been unilaterally hostile to the meme. Would you mind if - subject to tencrush also concurring - I posted a link on my lj to your thread here? I think it would be interesting for people on my flist to see that my own very vehement dislike of the meme isn't a universal viewpoint.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-11-25 12:36 am (UTC)It's interesting that you've moved so quickly to replicate two of the meme's commonest weaknesses: steering a discussion from the impersonal (the question of whether it's 'unreasonable' to state that everyone who participates in the meme implicitly condones it) to the personal (whether it's 'reasonable' for the meme to lambast me for calling it a shoal of cunts'). And mis-interpretation, because at no point have I complained about the meme being offended by being described as 'cunts'. Indeed, I've said here and in my own blog that I welcome their offended comments, since they are tangible proof of the meme's hypocrisy. Nor did I suggest anywhere that the meme's 'eviscerating' of me was somehow worse than anything I've said about it in my own journal: why would you suggest that I did? To put it bluntly, your response here suggests that, like the meme, you're uncomfortable dealing with abstract concepts and verifiable substance, and happier when rebutting a debate point by falling back on a personal attack based on mis-representation of the facts.
Handwave or 'suspect' subjectively all you like, but the meme operates a double standard when it openly labels me a sexist and a misogynist because I use a female-derived slang term as an insult, but at the same time ignores and condones the widespread use of '[x term]-whore' as an insult (attention whore, grammar whore', etc). The meme rules state 'don't be sexist', but 'whore' is a sexist term that the meme collective 'you' are happy to use. Presumably, until someone criticising the meme uses it, at which point the 'sexist' slur will be deployed again, and the collective 'you' will once again choose to ignore the double standard.
As you've chosen to make this personal, let's be very clear about the personal element. I didn't launch some attack on the meme out of the blue. Some weeks ago, I queried a mod call there and, as a result of that discussion, was banned for harrassing the mods. The meme then, repeatedly, cited me by name in anon threads and branded me a troll and a racist (or at best, someone who absolutely equated negative comments about a TV show with racism). As I'm unable to respond there, I flagged the defamation in my own journal and responded with defamation of my own. Now, I understand that, while the meme loves its self-appointed role as the fandom police, scouring random journals in search of content to mock and deride, it is collectively far less happy when it is subjected to the same scrutiny and open mockery. But, to use your own terms, if the meme is going to dish it out to me, then I'll dish it back, every time. You apparently find this ridiculous of me, and that's your entitlement, just as I find it at the very least 'ridiculous', as well as offensive and hypocritical, for anyone to claim that the meme is, on the whole, a reasonable place whose members should not ever be collectively blamed when some of them behave offensively.
You are, however, the only person I've so far seen who's been willing to argue on behalf of the meme's collective reasonableness in a public post with your own lj-name attached. Responses in my own blog have been unilaterally hostile to the meme. Would you mind if - subject to