Opinion of Memphis

[Gustaf]

These discussions about gender - and gender-related behaviour - made by people who seems not to have any clue about anyone but themselves (and this, surely, on the very shallow level of self knowledge most people have) are a very good way to lose the very last hopes about human beings as individuals.

Dammit!! Reading an argument between 15 years old machista thinking patterns against 15 years unsophisticated-pseudo-feminist thinking patterns is a very bad exercise on self-inflicted psychological torture.


Why don't you boys and girls of all ages and chromosomes just go around meeting people, treating them like people, knowing them deeply (once you really connect to someone, he/she will always open up their soul to you; try it kids, it's not that hard, you just must demonstrate you're not wanting to use them or take something from them - just be sincere and amicable) and, doing so, start to perceive how contradictory the individuals of our species are?
How prone to be douchebags and, and the same time, to be selfless we all are?
How males and females of any body configuration are different one of each other as groups? And how oddly we are the same and we're doing the same stupid things all the time, again and again?

Let me tell you somethings, for you seemingly inexperienced in life folks to start:

- men are all douchebags;
- women too, but a bit less conspicuously;
- but if you like one of those groups (or both, if that's your thing) It's marvellous to hang out and to live together;
- and it's also like hell;
- and coexisting with your own kind is much more easy;
- and men are plainer than women and easier to deal, in any kind of relationship (love, friendship, whatever);
- but this doesn't make us any less complicated - we are very complicated too;
- but once you understand the other group (and you'll just not understand if you spend energy on not paying attention to them) it's like learning another language without formal study - that immersion technique, you know?
- and people behave differently, and many of them go way out the stereotypes;
- and there's absolutely nothing remarkable in what I wrote here: it's cliché, over cliché, over cliché, just because it's obvious - but such a few people stops to pay attention to those clichés.


So, please, stop this stupid discussion and go meet the world. It's not far at all; I bet that in your extended Family and neighbourhood you can find all the material you need.

Porra!! Cambada de cabaços!


(sorry for the bad expeletives in Portuguese, but I just needed to relax a little).

I think the issue is precisely that some of us have bothered to understand how it is to be other people in the real world and some of us haven't.

[afleitch]

This happened over the last few days and is quite nicely timed to fit in with this discussion.

Now, in the world of say Memphis I guess this is a sign of weak character and thus one should not show consideration for her, being weak and all.

Why not ask him? I mean, she’s vulnerable due to her illness, is in a strange land and a stranger is coming on to her repeatedly. That would be considered harassment. I think Memphis would consider it harassment too;

I am not a supporter of harassment. Persistent slimy behavior is inexcusable.

[Gustaf]

This happened over the last few days and is quite nicely timed to fit in with this discussion.

Now, in the world of say Memphis I guess this is a sign of weak character and thus one should not show consideration for her, being weak and all.

Why not ask him? I mean, she’s vulnerable due to her illness, is in a strange land and a stranger is coming on to her repeatedly. That would be considered harassment. I think Memphis would consider it harassment too;

I am not a supporter of harassment. Persistent slimy behavior is inexcusable.

He thought messaging a young girl asking her to come to a hotel room to get drunk was totally cool, so I'll admit I'm inferring.

He also seemed to think that it was ok for a woman to rub herself all over him and that this should go both ways, so he seemed to imply that it was all right to feel someone up in the workplace as long as it's not persistent.

When is someone is as far beyond the pale as he is, it's hard to make charitable interpretations of their positions though.

[tik 🪀✨]

These discussions about gender - and gender-related behaviour - made by people who seems not to have any clue about anyone but themselves (and this, surely, on the very shallow level of self knowledge most people have) are a very good way to lose the very last hopes about human beings as individuals.

Dammit!! Reading an argument between 15 years old machista thinking patterns against 15 years unsophisticated-pseudo-feminist thinking patterns is a very bad exercise on self-inflicted psychological torture.


Why don't you boys and girls of all ages and chromosomes just go around meeting people, treating them like people, knowing them deeply (once you really connect to someone, he/she will always open up their soul to you; try it kids, it's not that hard, you just must demonstrate you're not wanting to use them or take something from them - just be sincere and amicable) and, doing so, start to perceive how contradictory the individuals of our species are?
How prone to be douchebags and, and the same time, to be selfless we all are?
How males and females of any body configuration are different one of each other as groups? And how oddly we are the same and we're doing the same stupid things all the time, again and again?

Let me tell you somethings, for you seemingly inexperienced in life folks to start:

- men are all douchebags;
- women too, but a bit less conspicuously;
- but if you like one of those groups (or both, if that's your thing) It's marvellous to hang out and to live together;
- and it's also like hell;
- and coexisting with your own kind is much more easy;
- and men are plainer than women and easier to deal, in any kind of relationship (love, friendship, whatever);
- but this doesn't make us any less complicated - we are very complicated too;
- but once you understand the other group (and you'll just not understand if you spend energy on not paying attention to them) it's like learning another language without formal study - that immersion technique, you know?
- and people behave differently, and many of them go way out the stereotypes;
- and there's absolutely nothing remarkable in what I wrote here: it's cliché, over cliché, over cliché, just because it's obvious - but such a few people stops to pay attention to those clichés.


So, please, stop this stupid discussion and go meet the world. It's not far at all; I bet that in your extended Family and neighbourhood you can find all the material you need.

Porra!! Cambada de cabaços!


(sorry for the bad expeletives in Portuguese, but I just needed to relax a little).

I have a fun game - let's spot the inconsistencies! Here's what just happened:

- You replied to the thread
- You made broad generalisations of everyone involved in this discussion
- You then tell us not to make broad generalisations about individuals
- You make some sweeping statements about men and women
- You tell us that men and women are more than these cliches
- You told everyone to stop replying to the thread

I understand that this is a frustrating discussion, but the point we're making is rather similar to yours (at least half of the time). We need to get to know an individual before judging them and base behaviour as such. But, even when we get to know them, we will still compartmentalize them in some ways in our heads because it's easier on the brain to find and sort with patterns. The way Team Memphis has organised people mentally because of their genitals is destructive and can be very hurtful, but of course not for everyone in all circumstances. The point: look beyond gender and see the individual, being sensitive to how your actions can be perceived. Is that not fair? Is that the ideal of someone with no life experience?

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

I agree with afleitch that Gustaf's example here isn't something memphis would agree with.  I think Gustaf is bordering on beng very unfair at this point.

[memphis]

I agree with afleitch that Gustaf's example here isn't something memphis would agree with.  I think Gustaf is bordering on beng very unfair at this point.

Gus has created a monster in his head, and no amount of reasoning can slay the dragon. He sees it and so will forever insist it is real.

[afleitch]

He thought messaging a young girl asking her to come to a hotel room to get drunk was totally cool, so I'll admit I'm inferring.

He also seemed to think that it was ok for a woman to rub herself all over him and that this should go both ways, so he seemed to imply that it was all right to feel someone up in the workplace as long as it's not persistent.

When is someone is as far beyond the pale as he is, it's hard to make charitable interpretations of their positions though.

I’ve looked through his posting history and any deleted posts on the moderators forum.

I have not read at any point where he said that messaging a young girl to come to a hotel room was ‘totally cool’

I have read;

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What he was referring to was that people are bad at courtship and it goes both ways, a statement which is essentially true. What he then said was that if someone comes on to you, you should take it as a compliment. Not very tactful and easy to disagree with, but no where did he say that a woman rubbing herself over him should go ‘both ways.’ He just used that as an example of a very forward way in which a woman came on to him.

It can be worse when you’re gay and you’re not seen as a threat; I’ve had my bottom slapped, my junk fondled, had women sit on my lap, been forcibly kissed and been told to flex. You’d be surprised what women do for sexual kinks when they feel safe.

But back to the point. There are things memphis said. Then there are things he didn't say. That's why during 'that' week, I really didn't understand what purpose was being served by attributing to memphis everything from promoting self harm to going back to the days of electro-shock therapy. Lots of things he never said, but were raised by other people then a page later suddenly became attributed to him. It was embarrasing to read.

[batmacumba]

These discussions about gender - and gender-related behaviour - made by people who seems not to have any clue about anyone but themselves (and this, surely, on the very shallow level of self knowledge most people have) are a very good way to lose the very last hopes about human beings as individuals.

Dammit!! Reading an argument between 15 years old machista thinking patterns against 15 years unsophisticated-pseudo-feminist thinking patterns is a very bad exercise on self-inflicted psychological torture.


Why don't you boys and girls of all ages and chromosomes just go around meeting people, treating them like people, knowing them deeply (once you really connect to someone, he/she will always open up their soul to you; try it kids, it's not that hard, you just must demonstrate you're not wanting to use them or take something from them - just be sincere and amicable) and, doing so, start to perceive how contradictory the individuals of our species are?
How prone to be douchebags and, and the same time, to be selfless we all are?
How males and females of any body configuration are different one of each other as groups? And how oddly we are the same and we're doing the same stupid things all the time, again and again?

Let me tell you somethings, for you seemingly inexperienced in life folks to start:

- men are all douchebags;
- women too, but a bit less conspicuously;
- but if you like one of those groups (or both, if that's your thing) It's marvellous to hang out and to live together;
- and it's also like hell;
- and coexisting with your own kind is much more easy;
- and men are plainer than women and easier to deal, in any kind of relationship (love, friendship, whatever);
- but this doesn't make us any less complicated - we are very complicated too;
- but once you understand the other group (and you'll just not understand if you spend energy on not paying attention to them) it's like learning another language without formal study - that immersion technique, you know?
- and people behave differently, and many of them go way out the stereotypes;
- and there's absolutely nothing remarkable in what I wrote here: it's cliché, over cliché, over cliché, just because it's obvious - but such a few people stops to pay attention to those clichés.


So, please, stop this stupid discussion and go meet the world. It's not far at all; I bet that in your extended Family and neighbourhood you can find all the material you need.

Porra!! Cambada de cabaços!


(sorry for the bad expeletives in Portuguese, but I just needed to relax a little).

I have a fun game - let's spot the inconsistencies! Here's what just happened:

- You replied to the thread
- You made broad generalisations of everyone involved in this discussion
- You then tell us not to make broad generalisations about individuals
- You make some sweeping statements about men and women
- You tell us that men and women are more than these cliches
- You told everyone to stop replying to the thread

I understand that this is a frustrating discussion, but the point we're making is rather similar to yours (at least half of the time). We need to get to know an individual before judging them and base behaviour as such. But, even when we get to know them, we will still compartmentalize them in some ways in our heads because it's easier on the brain to find and sort with patterns. The way Team Memphis has organised people mentally because of their genitals is destructive and can be very hurtful, but of course not for everyone in all circumstances. The point: look beyond gender and see the individual, being sensitive to how your actions can be perceived. Is that not fair? Is that the ideal of someone with no life experience?

Tik,

Your answer is precisely what I'm talking about. But once I believe that the communicator is always to blame when the messenge isn't understood, I'll try to put it in a more sinthetical way:


First rule: there are not universal generalizations to make. Nothing is universal in dynamic systems, and human behaviour is a dynamic system.
There are general rules, on the other hand. And every rule has exceptions. This is not Newtonian physics.
Also, the general rules must be observed only to help us foreseing how will we deal with things, because the second rule of the real world is that nothing is immutable, except mutability itself.
Living is inconsistent sometimes, but It's mainly contradictory. And contradiction is almost never inconsistent.

Sorry for the poor philosophy. If you want a higher type, just go to a philosophy forum. But to expect the type of 'consistence' you're expecting from the world will only depress you. Observe the contradictions, and work over them.
This is not a advice, or self-declared truth. It's just a perception of someone who had tried since his early ages to observe the world just to enjoy it, instead of controling it.
Memphis throw interesting arguments, a minority of the time, but everyone is more interested in pointing the finger of misoginy in his face, not in hearing what type of cultural perception someone who is perceived as a misogynist is showing.
All the time, also, the arguments in defense of feminism, here (I'm not talking about real feminist debates, which had passed this kind of problem since the early 90's, or some time around), just goes beyond common real situations and try to find a rule (as this was a possibility) in the most extreme and awful situations.
Gustaf, this last one is for you...
If this a real situation, your friend had only two options:
- tell the imbecil He is being a douchebag, harasser and abuser (i didn't understand if she already tried It), most of the time, sexual hawks aren't that aware they're behaving monstruously, and a good kick is sufficient to put them on their corner (sexual freaks are most of the time cowards, who aren't wishing - or have competence - to do things in a more respectful way;
- call the police. The only way to stop abusers is scarying them to prepare their attack.


The problem I've found in this whole debate, and that I complained, is that is pretty obvious (for someone who met and hanged with people on the most diverse behaviors) that most of you are trying to argue about an issue about which you seem to have absolute no experience beyond your own poorly understood feelings.
To be prepared for attack is the primary male behaviour on mammals. To hold off this instinct is, thus, the first duty of the civilized man. On the other hand, if you just scrap this instinct off, you stop to appealing as a male.
Again, real life is contradictory, and I know some women (please, kids, pay attention to the word: SOME) who would believe to be very strange if the douchebag in Gustaf's report didn't act that awful way.
And, again, this happens because there are exceptions to every behavioral 'rule'. Worse - in some groups or communities exceptions are the rule.

Now, I'll give the same advice (this was the advice and I sustain it): you should all stop this improductive discussion and know real people. They are unique individuals AND behave according to stereotypes.And opposition to them. And according to 'unespected stereotypes' (this only looks like an oxymoron - it's not); and against it (specially those of us who hate stereotypes and tend to purpotedly do the opposition of what is expected) - and doing this is also a kind of stereotype.

People act in sui generis ways and according to general rules (that actually doesn't exist) at the same time. World is contradictory and complicated. And this is its beauty. Stop being consistency Stalins, please.

[politicus]

These discussions about gender - and gender-related behaviour - made by people who seems not to have any clue about anyone but themselves (and this, surely, on the very shallow level of self knowledge most people have) are a very good way to lose the very last hopes about human beings as individuals.

Dammit!! Reading an argument between 15 years old machista thinking patterns against 15 years unsophisticated-pseudo-feminist thinking patterns is a very bad exercise on self-inflicted psychological torture.


Why don't you boys and girls of all ages and chromosomes just go around meeting people, treating them like people, knowing them deeply (once you really connect to someone, he/she will always open up their soul to you; try it kids, it's not that hard, you just must demonstrate you're not wanting to use them or take something from them - just be sincere and amicable) and, doing so, start to perceive how contradictory the individuals of our species are?
How prone to be douchebags and, and the same time, to be selfless we all are?
How males and females of any body configuration are different one of each other as groups? And how oddly we are the same and we're doing the same stupid things all the time, again and again?

Let me tell you somethings, for you seemingly inexperienced in life folks to start:

- men are all douchebags;
- women too, but a bit less conspicuously;
- but if you like one of those groups (or both, if that's your thing) It's marvellous to hang out and to live together;
- and it's also like hell;
- and coexisting with your own kind is much more easy;
- and men are plainer than women and easier to deal, in any kind of relationship (love, friendship, whatever);
- but this doesn't make us any less complicated - we are very complicated too;
- but once you understand the other group (and you'll just not understand if you spend energy on not paying attention to them) it's like learning another language without formal study - that immersion technique, you know?
- and people behave differently, and many of them go way out the stereotypes;
- and there's absolutely nothing remarkable in what I wrote here: it's cliché, over cliché, over cliché, just because it's obvious - but such a few people stops to pay attention to those clichés.


So, please, stop this stupid discussion and go meet the world. It's not far at all; I bet that in your extended Family and neighbourhood you can find all the material you need.

Porra!! Cambada de cabaços!


(sorry for the bad expeletives in Portuguese, but I just needed to relax a little).

I have a fun game - let's spot the inconsistencies! Here's what just happened:

- You replied to the thread
- You made broad generalisations of everyone involved in this discussion
- You then tell us not to make broad generalisations about individuals
- You make some sweeping statements about men and women
- You tell us that men and women are more than these cliches
- You told everyone to stop replying to the thread

I understand that this is a frustrating discussion, but the point we're making is rather similar to yours (at least half of the time). We need to get to know an individual before judging them and base behaviour as such. But, even when we get to know them, we will still compartmentalize them in some ways in our heads because it's easier on the brain to find and sort with patterns. The way Team Memphis has organised people mentally because of their genitals is destructive and can be very hurtful, but of course not for everyone in all circumstances. The point: look beyond gender and see the individual, being sensitive to how your actions can be perceived. Is that not fair? Is that the ideal of someone with no life experience?

Tik,

Your answer is precisely what I'm talking about. But once I believe that the communicator is always to blame when the messenge isn't understood, I'll try to put it in a more sinthetical way:


First rule: there are not universal generalizations to make. Nothing is universal in dynamic systems, and human behaviour is a dynamic system.
There are general rules, on the other hand. And every rule has exceptions. This is not Newtonian physics.
Also, the general rules must be observed only to help us foreseing how will we deal with things, because the second rule of the real world is that nothing is immutable, except mutability itself.
Living is inconsistent sometimes, but It's mainly contradictory. And contradiction is almost never inconsistent.

Sorry for the poor philosophy. If you want a higher type, just go to a philosophy forum. But to expect the type of 'consistence' you're expecting from the world will only depress you. Observe the contradictions, and work over them.
This is not a advice, or self-declared truth. It's just a perception of someone who had tried since his early ages to observe the world just to enjoy it, instead of controling it.
Memphis throw interesting arguments, a minority of the time, but everyone is more interested in pointing the finger of misoginy in his face, not in hearing what type of cultural perception someone who is perceived as a misogynist is showing.
All the time, also, the arguments in defense of feminism, here (I'm not talking about real feminist debates, which had passed this kind of problem since the early 90's, or some time around), just goes beyond common real situations and try to find a rule (as this was a possibility) in the most extreme and awful situations.
Gustaf, this last one is for you...
If this a real situation, your friend had only two options:
- tell the imbecil He is being a douchebag, harasser and abuser (i didn't understand if she already did It), most of the time, sexual hawks aren't that aware they're behaving monstruously, and a good kick is sufficient to put them on their corner (sexual freaks are most of the time cowards, who aren't wishing - or have competence - to do things in a more respectful way) - this usually works with the least insistent ones;
- call the police. The only way to stop insistent abusers is scarying them to prepare their attack.


The problem I've found in this whole debate, and that I complained, is that is pretty obvious (for someone who met and hanged with people on the most diverse behaviors) that most of you are trying to argue about an issue about which you seem to have absolute no experience beyond your own poorly understood feelings.
To be prepared for attack is the primary male behaviour on mammals. To hold off this instinct is, thus, the first duty of the civilized man. On the other hand, if you just scrap this instinct off, you stop to appealing as a male.
Again, real life is contradictory, and I know some women (please, kids, pay attention to the word: SOME) who would believe to be very strange if the douchebag in Gustaf's report didn't act that awful way.
And, again, this happens because there are exceptions to every behavioral 'rule'. Worse - in some groups or communities exceptions are the rule.

Now, I'll give the same advice (this was the advice and I sustain it): you should all stop this improductive discussion and know real people. They are unique individuals AND behave according to stereotypes.And opposition to them. And according to 'unespected stereotypes' (this only looks like an oxymoron - it's not); and against it (specially those of us who hate stereotypes and tend to purpotedly do the opposition of what is expected) - and doing this is also a kind of stereotype.

People act in sui generis ways and according to general rules (that actually doesn't exist) at the same time. World is contradictory and complicated. And this is its beauty. Stop being consistency Stalins, please.

Your attempt to be "deep" and explain "how things really are" based on your enormous life experience is not helpful to any of the parties in this dispute (or the rest of us). So I suggest you just stay out of it.

[Gustaf]

I agree with afleitch that Gustaf's example here isn't something memphis would agree with.  I think Gustaf is bordering on beng very unfair at this point.

Gus has created a monster in his head, and no amount of reasoning can slay the dragon. He sees it and so will forever insist it is real.

You've created an impression of yourself through repeated posting on these topics. And the impression is not very pleasant. I've been very careful to stick to things you've actually said and you've had plenty of opportunity to explain them. That you resort to just ad hominems and playing victim cards is quite indicative. I posed you a series of questions in your thread trying to de-mod me. You're still free to answer them, you know.

[bgwah]

Memphis supports raping sick and disabled women!

Lol. Classic Gustaf.

[Gustaf]

Memphis supports raping sick and disabled women!

Lol. Classic Gustaf.

Eh. Now you're ironically engaging in the behaviour I'm being accused of. I never used the word rape.

Also, you don't have to worry. I still rank you lower than Memphis in terms of likability.

Memphis is very oblivious to how it feels to be a woman and what it is like to feel vulnerable. His posts repeat these notions ad nauseam. So I thought it might be instructive to give an example of it.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Why doesn't Gustaf ever rave about hating any right wing posters?

[Gustaf]

Why doesn't Gustaf ever rave about hating any right wing posters?

Because I don't enjoy lynch mobs. We've been over that. And before you get started, I've opposed Memphis since before it was cool.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Because you've never been on a hate bandwagon against any poster before....

[bgwah]

Memphis supports raping sick and disabled women!

Lol. Classic Gustaf.

Eh. Now you're ironically engaging in the behaviour I'm being accused of. I never used the word rape.

Obviously. It is kind of fun, so I see why you do it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Oh goody! Does that mean I rank higher in other areas?

[rejectamenta]

Your attempt to be "deep" and explain "how things really are" based on your enormous life experience is not helpful to any of the parties in this dispute (or the rest of us). So I suggest you just stay out of it.

I think he raised a decent point about people being "consistency Stalins" and fundamentally failing to interface with each other throughout this thread. I chalk up the reasoning more towards the inherent anti-social aspects of anonymous internet chatter over lack of real-world experience, though.

[Gustaf]

Because you've never been on a hate bandwagon against any poster before....

I don't do it in a bandwagon way. But often there are others who agree with me at some point. That's not so strange.

I don't have your need to pick a side to root for. I'm more individualist in my mindset, you like to have something to follow.

[Gustaf]

Memphis supports raping sick and disabled women!

Lol. Classic Gustaf.

Eh. Now you're ironically engaging in the behaviour I'm being accused of. I never used the word rape.

Obviously. It is kind of fun, so I see why you do it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Oh goody! Does that mean I rank higher in other areas?

Well, I don't think that's what I do.

I certainly think you're smarter - being nasty seems to be more of a conscious choice for you, while Memphis more comes off as clueless and bigoted. I don't think he fully understands how cruel his attitude is.

[Sbane]

Because you've never been on a hate bandwagon against any poster before....

I don't do it in a bandwagon way. But often there are others who agree with me at some point. That's not so strange.

I don't have your need to pick a side to root for. I'm more individualist in my mindset, you like to have something to follow.

Regardless of the merits, wasn't there a mob that went after Memphis this last week? Again, not making a judgement, just pointing it out that there was a mob mentality present when you guys were going after him. Why is it ok to go after him in that fashion but not right wingers who might spouse "disgusting" views?

[bgwah]

^ You're absolutely right, Sbane. A mob went after Memphis and Gustaf was more than happy to join in.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

On the next opinion of duke

[Velasco]

Because you've never been on a hate bandwagon against any poster before....

I don't do it in a bandwagon way. But often there are others who agree with me at some point. That's not so strange.

I don't have your need to pick a side to root for. I'm more individualist in my mindset, you like to have something to follow.

Regardless of the merits, wasn't there a mob that went after Memphis this last week? Again, not making a judgement, just pointing it out that there was a mob mentality present when you guys were going after him. Why is it ok to go after him in that fashion but not right wingers who might spouse "disgusting" views?

Well, no, or if the guy was attacked by an angry mob it was fully deserved. In despite of memphis' complains, he started making derogatory statements, probably because he has some personal hatred of Nathan (and I really don't care about it; I just cared about his views and qualifying adjectives, pretty disgusting, yes). I get BK's point in a previous (and good) post because some of memphis' mindsets on gender identity or the relationship between sexes are common places outside the South of the USA. I see them every day around me. However, this is not what I found more horrible, but his ad hominem attacks on people with gender identity issues and some of his statements. Though I don't have enough elements to judge someone here as an intrinsically good or bad person, some horrible things he previously wrote haven't been rectified.

[Gustaf]

Because you've never been on a hate bandwagon against any poster before....

I don't do it in a bandwagon way. But often there are others who agree with me at some point. That's not so strange.

I don't have your need to pick a side to root for. I'm more individualist in my mindset, you like to have something to follow.

Regardless of the merits, wasn't there a mob that went after Memphis this last week? Again, not making a judgement, just pointing it out that there was a mob mentality present when you guys were going after him. Why is it ok to go after him in that fashion but not right wingers who might spouse "disgusting" views?

First of all, there is a big difference between someone till pulling like 40% FF votes and the posters in the past who were pretty much driven off the forum through constant bullying. This is nowhere near the mob behaviour I criticized in the past.

Secondly, I don't enjoy going on the bandwagon. In this case, I already disliked Memphis. I didn't need a mob to back me on it, but when the issue of his misogyny comes up I suppose I was already interested.

When everyone wants to feel good about themselves for hating on the latest tea party member it doesn't interest me as much. And it's also a bit distasteful.

I have to say though, it's an interesting attempt to shift this to total irrelevance. Let's assume for a moment that it is true that many people have gone after Memphis the last week and that some did so because others were doing it. How is that a defence of the stuff he said?

[Sbane]

You just don't get it Gustaf. Sure, you and others think Memphis said some awful things. I am not going to quarrel with you on that point. The point is that some right wingers also espouse some disgusting views and you find it "distasteful" that people go after them (most of them are genuinely offended by those and not just joining in). And yet you are more than happy to jump on Memphis. So what is the difference between Memphis and those right wingers? Is it that Memphis can get 40% FF votes and otherwise has left wing views. So if some right winger here can get 40% FF votes but then starts to go off the deep end about gay people, would you criticize him or would you find it "distasteful"?