|
Post by leftturnonly on Jun 29, 2016 15:00:52 GMT
leftturnonly , I have no first hand knowledge of these issues in the way you do. So, in your opinion, what should we (general Peas) do....how should we respond when someone who may or maybe not be affected by these things but is frequently posting things that either upset or offend other community members? I would think that ignoring would be distressing to her, but maybe not? I would find it very hard to respond casually as if they were talking about what colour car is best when actually they're saying something much less banal. Again - addressing this to General You... If a particular poster pushes your buttons, the ignore feature is your friend. If you do choose to read and respond, it's helpful to NOT do so when you're reacting emotionally. Slow down. Cool off first. Read and reread what you have written. Strip as much emotion from your response as you can before you post. You are responsible for how you respond. As has already been noted, what's going to be accomplished by tearing into someone on a regular basis? This is a large community. There are people here who run the whole range of being socially able. If someone hasn't taken the hint the first umpteen times they've been called out - for whatever reason - where's the logic in doing it umpteen more times? That approach doesn't work. It doesn't produce a different result. Continuing in that manner is an exercise in futility. If a person does not get the feedback that they are reaching an audience, then they may feel that their message is not heard. If they want to be heard, they can try a different approach and continue doing so until they get the kind of response they desire. They will learn more by being rewarded for posting in a way that is less negative to others than by getting the attention for the wrong reasons. They have something to say, they want an audience, and if the numbers show that this was accomplished, there's no reason to change what they're doing. Wanting an audience to hear you is not a negative thing. We all want to be heard and we all have to learn how to accomplish that at some point. Someone with a difference of opinion wants to be heard just as much as you do. Someone with social challenges may want it even more. Some people are just frustrating to interact with. It's the nature of the beast for those unable to properly interpret appropriate social behavior. Patience, patience, and then even more patience is needed. Change happens slowly for them. They don't see the same need to do things differently that others do. They're never going to fully get it, and if they are aware they don't relate well to others, they just might not care. Word to the wise. Be careful who you name your child after. If you name your child after several of the most stubborn people in your family, your child might end up being as stubborn as all of them combined. A good sense of humor can really make a difference!
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 13, 2024 12:23:18 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2016 15:02:31 GMT
Well actually yes she should be ignored. It is entirely possible she says the things that she does to get a rise out people and all the while sitting wherever laughing her head off at our expense. The more outrageous things she says the more upset those on this board get and the more attention she gets. Look at this thread. It's 11 pages long and a fair amount has to do with her. If she is at hate filled as some believe there is nothing we can do to change her as she is an anonymous person on a scrapbooking board. And regardless if she is punking us or truly a hate filled person the last thing she should be getting is the attention that she appears to be craving. Just something to ponder. I am not trying to change her, I know there is no changing her but I will not ignore her ignorant statements. To me silence equals agreement.
You are correct that, on this board anyway, she can't be changed and it doesn't matter if she punking us or is a hate filled person. However ignoring her, to me anyway, sends a strong message that her comments are unacceptable instead of feeding the beast by responding to her over and over. If she is ignored eventually her comments will stop. After all she will no longer have an audience. And on a board like this that is the best one can hope for. But in the end everyone has to do what they feel is right.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 13, 2024 12:23:18 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2016 15:34:27 GMT
I am not trying to change her, I know there is no changing her but I will not ignore her ignorant statements. To me silence equals agreement.
You are correct that, on this board anyway, she can't be changed and it doesn't matter if she punking us or is a hate filled person. However ignoring her, to me anyway, sends a strong message that her comments are unacceptable instead of feeding the beast by responding to her over and over. If she is ignored eventually her comments will stop. After all she will no longer have an audience. And on a board like this that is the best one can hope for. But in the end everyone has to do what they feel is right. We'll have to disagree than, to me ignoring her is giving her silent acceptance.
|
|
|
Post by whopea on Jun 29, 2016 15:48:10 GMT
I'm quoting you, Lefty, but this also for whopea . I hear what you are both saying to a degree, especially when we are talking about vague references, however, when someone calls a group of people "freaks" and "mentally ill" because ONLY of their sexual orientation, I am not sure how anyone can see that as anything as homophobia. I mean this sincerely, explain it to me how calling people who are LGBT mentally ill and a freak show is not homophobic, especially when that person has interacted with numerous people who have told her how offensive it is. That's just it, I don't think anyone disagrees with you on those specific instances. I, for one, do not disagree on those specific instances. No argument here.
|
|
Country Ham
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,313
Jun 25, 2014 19:32:08 GMT
|
Post by Country Ham on Jun 29, 2016 15:58:53 GMT
That's just it, I don't think anyone disagrees with you on those specific instances. I, for one, do not disagree on those specific instances. No argument here. Here's my thing. I think the government is not my Church and I have no issues with the government allowing same sex marriages. I have never called someone who identifies as a homosexual a name. I do think it's a sin though, and that's a church issue. I have been called a homophobe on this board. A phobia is an irrational fear of something. I have no fears of folks in same sex relationships, I do not think the world is gonna cave in when the government gives these couples the same rights as a male/female couple. I don't stop watching my favorite shows when characters "come out". Yet because I think it's a sin I have been called a homophobe by folks on 2peas and my opinions dismissed as such. Back 25 years ago when I worked as an RN in Canada I held the hand of many young men as they died of AIDS related complications. Whose families and partners abandoned them. Yet I am the homophobe according to some. The word 'homophobe' is just as dismissive as "freaks" etc. It's said in an derogatory way for the most part. Save
|
|
|
Post by whopea on Jun 29, 2016 15:59:38 GMT
The problem with this train of thought is that what is considered racist, homophobic and discriminatory is the eye (ear?) of the beholder and it varies from person to person. I would suggest that in recent years that line of speech has been dumbed down, if you will, so that just about anything can be included. It has become a tactic of the left to define any speech they don't like as derogatory so as to quickly shut down the discussion since there is no adequate response. I know what racism, homophobia and discrimination are. I've been paid less and treated completely differently because of my sex. My skin color is derided to my face, and my family has been told how privileged we are just because of our skin color by total strangers who swagger on with their own bad selves carrying chips as big as the sky on their shoulders without a clue that they are living a life far more privileged than the person they just sneered at. My child has been ostracized and made fun of to the point that I withdrew her from public school for her own protection. We have generation after generation after generation of children & young adults losing their parents far too young and being left without. And I can go on. ETA - I should age ageism to that list. I've been on the wrong end of that, too.
Do we have the same problems as a family that endured slavery? No, but then again, neither does President Obama. He's half white. Is he racist? Or does the color of one's skin automatically protect or condemn them here? And isn't *that* racism?I live in the deep south. My MIL grew up with Jim Crow laws. The physical remnants survive even though most of the people have long gone to the great beyond. The scars to the families may outlast even those. These scarred people are my neighbors, my friends, my co-workers. Our children have attended the same schools and in many ways our lives are identical. I am not completely unqualified to speak on these issues. I do not agree with many of these declarations of racism, homophobia, xenophobia, etc. that are considered undeniable truths by so many here. I see shades of grey that are completely overlooked in this black & white outlook and it leaves me shaking my head .... and maybe looking forward to whatever hideous jello Hoff may turn up. Because one thing is absolutely certain. I am a fish swimming upstream here. I agree with you wholeheartedly and I'm very sorry about your daughter. If we could all acknowledge the shades of grey and nuances in an issue, I think we (generally and as a country) would be much more productive in our discussions and policy making debates.
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Jun 29, 2016 16:24:58 GMT
So we are just supposed it ignore all the horrible things she spews? Give her a pass because she might be on the spectrum? As the mom of not one but two gay kids, so far our youngest seems straight but who knows. Apparently my husband and I have FABULOUS genes. I'm going to continue to say something if she starts up with the homophobia and racism as my sons bf isn't white. I find her way more ignorant than on the spectrum. I know people on the spectrum and they are no where near as hate filled as she is. I've had a long night without sleep and this is a serious conversation. First - Rainbow - I see some similarities between you and someone else. Those similarities make me see your posts differently than a lot of others see them. I've tried to explain why that's so when I was asked, but people will see what they want to see here. If you're on the spectrum, off the spectrum, having a lark yanking people's chains or just plain someone who posts differently than other people do, it's irrelevant to my observation that there are similarities that I see between your posts and someone else. Second - The alternative being what? Poor admin took the most drastic steps I've seen here yet to demonstrate that how we respond to one another is getting out of hand. A pass to not be engaged with by putting her on ignore if she bothers you so much? Clearly, we have a difference of interpretation going on here. I was asked about my reactions. My reaction is to ignore someone entirely with the handy ignore button if I find I can't keep control of my responses to them. Going after someone again and again and again on these threads is not working.A person on the spectrum is accountable for their actions on a message board just as everyone else is. I do not react the same way to people I perceive may have processing difficulties as I do to people who I perceive don't, and since I was speaking about my responses and not yours or anyone else's, I find this sentiment in particular to be out of context and misleading. You are using your experience to make that judgement of her intent to post hate. I used my experience to judge her intent and came up with something different. I am not going to react the same way as someone else to what I perceive differently and I find being told I'm in the wrong for not behaving in what I think is an inappropriate responsive manner manipulative and overcontrolling. (Not you specifically Janc. That's pretty much what I was asked... if I recall correctly. I'm far too tired to remember the wording for certain and I'm not taking any longer to try to get some sleep.)
|
|
purplebee
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,732
Jun 27, 2014 20:37:34 GMT
|
Post by purplebee on Jun 29, 2016 17:24:16 GMT
leftturnonly , I have no first hand knowledge of these issues in the way you do. So, in your opinion, what should we (general Peas) do....how should we respond when someone who may or maybe not be affected by these things but is frequently posting things that either upset or offend other community members? I would think that ignoring would be distressing to her, but maybe not? I would find it very hard to respond casually as if they were talking about what colour car is best when actually they're saying something much less banal. Again - addressing this to General You... If a particular poster pushes your buttons, the ignore feature is your friend. If you do choose to read and respond, it's helpful to NOT do so when you're reacting emotionally. Slow down. Cool off first. Read and reread what you have written. Strip as much emotion from your response as you can before you post. You are responsible for how you respond. As has already been noted, what's going to be accomplished by tearing into someone on a regular basis? This is a large community. There are people here who run the whole range of being socially able. If someone hasn't taken the hint the first umpteen times they've been called out - for whatever reason - where's the logic in doing it umpteen more times? That approach doesn't work. It doesn't produce a different result. Continuing in that manner is an exercise in futility. If a person does not get the feedback that they are reaching an audience, then they may feel that their message is not heard. If they want to be heard, they can try a different approach and continue doing so until they get the kind of response they desire. They will learn more by being rewarded for posting in a way that is less negative to others than by getting the attention for the wrong reasons. They have something to say, they want an audience, and if the numbers show that this was accomplished, there's no reason to change what they're doing. Wanting an audience to hear you is not a negative thing. We all want to be heard and we all have to learn how to accomplish that at some point. Someone with a difference of opinion wants to be heard just as much as you do. Someone with social challenges may want it even more. Some people are just frustrating to interact with. It's the nature of the beast for those unable to properly interpret appropriate social behavior. Patience, patience, and then even more patience is needed. Change happens slowly for them. They don't see the same need to do things differently that others do. They're never going to fully get it, and if they are aware they don't relate well to others, they just might not care. Word to the wise. Be careful who you name your child after. If you name your child after several of the most stubborn people in your family, your child might end up being as stubborn as all of them combined. A good sense of humor can really make a difference! 1000 likes! I am a daily reader and sometimes poster. I have been a member since June of '14, and a lurker on the original board for a long time. I generally don't involve myself in the controversial threads. I usually have an opinion, but more vocal peas tend to voice it before I do, so I don't participate. I read all of it. I just want to say that left turn only, IMO, you are the voice of reason with this response. Hugs (REAL hugs, not attack hugs) to you!
|
|
flute4peace
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,757
Jul 3, 2014 14:38:35 GMT
|
Post by flute4peace on Jun 29, 2016 17:54:29 GMT
1000 likes! I am a daily reader and sometimes poster. I have been a member since June of '14, and a lurker on the original board for a long time. I generally don't involve myself in the controversial threads. I usually have an opinion, but more vocal peas tend to voice it before I do, so I don't participate. I read all of it. I just want to say that left turn only, IMO, you are the voice of reason with this response. Hugs (REAL hugs, not attack hugs) to you! AMEN
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 13, 2024 12:23:18 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2016 18:04:43 GMT
leftturnonly , I have no first hand knowledge of these issues in the way you do. So, in your opinion, what should we (general Peas) do....how should we respond when someone who may or maybe not be affected by these things but is frequently posting things that either upset or offend other community members? I would think that ignoring would be distressing to her, but maybe not? I would find it very hard to respond casually as if they were talking about what colour car is best when actually they're saying something much less banal. I hardly ever agree with Rainbow (I kind of feel icky talking about her with her knowledge-kind of like talking behind her back) but I have found that if I respond with some respect, we actually can have a bit of conversation. I am not sure we will ever agree on a lot of views, but over all, we don't always get into the circular arguments I sometimes see. Dunno, it probably makes me look weak or stupid or something, but do I try to see the value in everyone, even when I vehemently disagree with their views. I hope that others will do the same for me. This is what I like about you. You and several others have proven that a conversation can take place with Rainbow if that's what you actually want.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 13, 2024 12:23:18 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2016 18:27:44 GMT
" Then there was the thread that she started and the immediate first several posts were personal a t t a c k s meant to shut down Rainbow and the conversation. Someone started the EXACT same thread, in the EXACT same way and an interesting discussion took place." But they were NOT exactly the same. I am sure that Because of her posting history over years, people are not stupid as to how the threads inevitably end up. That plays into how anyone responds. I'm not wanting to argue, just putting out another perspective. I don't want to argue either, I'm participating in the discussion, just like everyone else. If you want a conversation and can understand that disagreeing and stating why is not "arguing for the sake of arguing", but that it's a part of conversation, then can I ask you if you know the specific threads I'm talking about? Because, yes they were on the EXACT same topic. One began with Now I've seen everything and the other began with WOW. One resulted in a discussion and the other resulted in a smack down.
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Jun 29, 2016 18:47:55 GMT
" Then there was the thread that she started and the immediate first several posts were personal a t t a c k s meant to shut down Rainbow and the conversation. Someone started the EXACT same thread, in the EXACT same way and an interesting discussion took place." But they were NOT exactly the same. I am sure that Because of her posting history over years, people are not stupid as to how the threads inevitably end up. That plays into how anyone responds. I'm not wanting to argue, just putting out another perspective. I don't want to argue either, I'm participating in the discussion, just like everyone else. If you want a conversation and can understand that disagreeing and stating why is not "arguing for the sake of arguing", but that it's a part of conversation, then can I ask you if you know the specific threads I'm talking about? Because, yes they were on the EXACT same topic. One began with Now I've seen everything and the other began with WOW. One resulted in a discussion and the other resulted in a smack down. Sort of like someone else and I can say almost the same thing and you smack me down or how you slapped me on this thread when I hadn't even said a word to you here? I admit I respond differently to Rainbow than I do to other people - if a newbie posted the same threads as Rainbow in the past month, my responses would be very different than my responses on Rainbow's current threads. The point being that people respond to posters differently based on their history with them. It is human nature. You and I respond differently to each other than we do to other posters. To expect everyone to treat each other exactly the same way, regardless of history, is a perhaps unreachable and/or unrealistic goal. I certainly don't expect it from others, and the reality is evidenced on this thread, as people have been supportive of me and I've also been called "fucked up" and "hateful." Same posts from me and very different responses based on my history with people. That is the nature of relationships that have existed over time.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 13, 2024 12:23:18 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2016 19:36:13 GMT
I don't want to argue either, I'm participating in the discussion, just like everyone else. If you want a conversation and can understand that disagreeing and stating why is not "arguing for the sake of arguing", but that it's a part of conversation, then can I ask you if you know the specific threads I'm talking about? Because, yes they were on the EXACT same topic. One began with Now I've seen everything and the other began with WOW. One resulted in a discussion and the other resulted in a smack down. Sort of like someone else and I can say almost the same thing and you smack me down or how you slapped me on this thread when I hadn't even said a word to you here? I admit I respond differently to Rainbow than I do to other people - if a newbie posted the same threads as Rainbow in the past month, my responses would be very different than my responses on Rainbow's current threads. The point being that people respond to posters differently based on their history with them. It is human nature. You and I respond differently to each other than we do to other posters. To expect everyone to treat each other exactly the same way, regardless of history, is a perhaps unreachable and/or unrealistic goal. I certainly don't expect it from others, and the reality is evidenced on this thread, as people have been supportive of me and I've also been called "fucked up" and "hateful." Same posts from me and very different responses based on my history with people. That is the nature of relationships that have existed over time. Elaine, there's a huge difference between respectfully disagreeing and calling people stupid, idiots, liars and being aggressively hostile to them as you do and are to those you disagree with.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Jun 29, 2016 19:48:11 GMT
I don't want to argue either, I'm participating in the discussion, just like everyone else. If you want a conversation and can understand that disagreeing and stating why is not "arguing for the sake of arguing", but that it's a part of conversation, then can I ask you if you know the specific threads I'm talking about? Because, yes they were on the EXACT same topic. One began with Now I've seen everything and the other began with WOW. One resulted in a discussion and the other resulted in a smack down. Sort of like someone else and I can say almost the same thing and you smack me down or how you slapped me on this thread when I hadn't even said a word to you here? I admit I respond differently to Rainbow than I do to other people - if a newbie posted the same threads as Rainbow in the past month, my responses would be very different than my responses on Rainbow's current threads. The point being that people respond to posters differently based on their history with them. It is human nature. You and I respond differently to each other than we do to other posters. To expect everyone to treat each other exactly the same way, regardless of history, is a perhaps unreachable and/or unrealistic goal. I certainly don't expect it from others, and the reality is evidenced on this thread, as people have been supportive of me and I've also been called "fucked up" and "hateful." Same posts from me and very different responses based on my history with people. That is the nature of relationships that have existed over time. This! The difference in the two posts aforementioned was the two different posters. Years of history lead many to respond to people (even if the subject is the same) very differently.
|
|
|
Post by ktdoesntscrap on Jun 29, 2016 20:09:15 GMT
I, for one, do not disagree on those specific instances. No argument here. Here's my thing. I think the government is not my Church and I have no issues with the government allowing same sex marriages. I have never called someone who identifies as a homosexual a name. I do think it's a sin though, and that's a church issue. I have been called a homophobe on this board. A phobia is an irrational fear of something. I have no fears of folks in same sex relationships, I do not think the world is gonna cave in when the government gives these couples the same rights as a male/female couple. I don't stop watching my favorite shows when characters "come out". Yet because I think it's a sin I have been called a homophobe by folks on 2peas and my opinions dismissed as such. Back 25 years ago when I worked as an RN in Canada I held the hand of many young men as they died of AIDS related complications. Whose families and partners abandoned them. Yet I am the homophobe according to some. The word 'homophobe' is just as dismissive as "freaks" etc. It's said in an derogatory way for the most part. SaveI don't think it is ever a compliment to call someone a homophobe. And I don't recall any instances where you were called a homophobe so I won't comment on that. (I am not saying it didn't happen I just don't remember any) Many people think a lot of things that other people do are sins. Pre-marital sex.. of any type comes to mind. Imagine today if we called out everyone who had pre-marital sex, if we called them Fornicators, or Sluts or Whores, based solely on the fact that they had premarital sex. If we publicly called them out, and tried to legislate against it. I would hope that people would be called out for doing that. Religion is no excuse to judge or put your values on others. That is between them and God. It has for a long time been okay, to call out, to humiliate, to judge people who choose to love someone of the same sex. If you want to judge them, that is your choice but when you decide to publicly judge or condemn them, call them sinners you should expect that people might call you out on your behavior. So maybe you aren't a homophobe, but based on what you wrote it does sound like you are taking God's place in judgement of people, branding them as sinners. I think it is unrealistic to expect no one to comment on that.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 13, 2024 12:23:18 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2016 20:12:17 GMT
Sort of like someone else and I can say almost the same thing and you smack me down or how you slapped me on this thread when I hadn't even said a word to you here? I admit I respond differently to Rainbow than I do to other people - if a newbie posted the same threads as Rainbow in the past month, my responses would be very different than my responses on Rainbow's current threads. The point being that people respond to posters differently based on their history with them. It is human nature. You and I respond differently to each other than we do to other posters. To expect everyone to treat each other exactly the same way, regardless of history, is a perhaps unreachable and/or unrealistic goal. I certainly don't expect it from others, and the reality is evidenced on this thread, as people have been supportive of me and I've also been called "fucked up" and "hateful." Same posts from me and very different responses based on my history with people. That is the nature of relationships that have existed over time. This! The difference in the two posts aforementioned was the two different posters. Years of history lead many to respond to people (even if the subject is the same) very differently. That's where the argument that it's all on her, falls apart. If it's the same topic as the other Pea and Rainbow has said nothing offensive, but you (general you) choose to make personal attacks on her based on her history and not what she's actually posted, that's a choice you (general you) have made. Not Rainbow. Rainbow is not the one at fault there.
|
|
Country Ham
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,313
Jun 25, 2014 19:32:08 GMT
|
Post by Country Ham on Jun 29, 2016 20:35:44 GMT
Here's my thing. I think the government is not my Church and I have no issues with the government allowing same sex marriages. I have never called someone who identifies as a homosexual a name. I do think it's a sin though, and that's a church issue. I have been called a homophobe on this board. A phobia is an irrational fear of something. I have no fears of folks in same sex relationships, I do not think the world is gonna cave in when the government gives these couples the same rights as a male/female couple. I don't stop watching my favorite shows when characters "come out". Yet because I think it's a sin I have been called a homophobe by folks on 2peas and my opinions dismissed as such. Back 25 years ago when I worked as an RN in Canada I held the hand of many young men as they died of AIDS related complications. Whose families and partners abandoned them. Yet I am the homophobe according to some. The word 'homophobe' is just as dismissive as "freaks" etc. It's said in an derogatory way for the most part. SaveI don't think it is ever a compliment to call someone a homophobe. And I don't recall any instances where you were called a homophobe so I won't comment on that. (I am not saying it didn't happen I just don't remember any) Many people think a lot of things that other people do are sins. Pre-marital sex.. of any type comes to mind. Imagine today if we called out everyone who had pre-marital sex, if we called them Fornicators, or Sluts or Whores, based solely on the fact that they had premarital sex. If we publicly called them out, and tried to legislate against it. I would hope that people would be called out for doing that. Religion is no excuse to judge or put your values on others. That is between them and God. It has for a long time been okay, to call out, to humiliate, to judge people who choose to love someone of the same sex. If you want to judge them, that is your choice but when you decide to publicly judge or condemn them, call them sinners you should expect that people might call you out on your behavior. So maybe you aren't a homophobe, but based on what you wrote it does sound like you are taking God's place in judgement of people, branding them as sinners. I think it is unrealistic to expect no one to comment on that. I would never call anyone engaged in premarital sex a slut or whore. But I would say they were committing a sin. The specific situation I addressed was about homosexuality because that's what the post I was quoting referred back to. I didn't arbitrarily chose to focus on that subject. Identifying sinful behavior is not a judgement. James 5:20 says "Whoever turns a sinner from the error of their way will save them from death and cover over a multitude of sins." That's part of the reason I am not a fan of facebook shaming, shaming from the pulpit etc. The purpose in doing that is not usually done out of love. It's usually one of self righteousness and finger pointing. I have things in my life I have overcome and I do pray that should I find myself heading back into those behaviors my family/friends will activity turn me away from that sin. I don't want them to sit at home and wipe their hands of me and say "not my place to judge her" because it's not judging me to lovingly guide me. Save
|
|
|
Post by secondlife on Jun 29, 2016 20:41:04 GMT
I, for one, do not disagree on those specific instances. No argument here. Here's my thing. I think the government is not my Church and I have no issues with the government allowing same sex marriages. I have never called someone who identifies as a homosexual a name. I do think it's a sin though, and that's a church issue. I have been called a homophobe on this board. A phobia is an irrational fear of something. I have no fears of folks in same sex relationships, I do not think the world is gonna cave in when the government gives these couples the same rights as a male/female couple. I don't stop watching my favorite shows when characters "come out". Yet because I think it's a sin I have been called a homophobe by folks on 2peas and my opinions dismissed as such. Back 25 years ago when I worked as an RN in Canada I held the hand of many young men as they died of AIDS related complications. Whose families and partners abandoned them. Yet I am the homophobe according to some. The word 'homophobe' is just as dismissive as "freaks" etc. It's said in an derogatory way for the most part. SaveI don't personally find a view that homosexuality is a sin to be homophobia. If I've expressed it that way, then this is my retraction. (I know you were not speaking to me, I'm just speaking in general.) The world I live in - I am a liberal, queer, Christian woman, in a heterosexual marriage, so some of my categories don't entirely fit - and most of my friends are more conservative, mostly evangelical types although I do have that subset of lefty friends who are pretty awesome too. But that means I live in this in between world. I actually like it that way. I don't live in an echo chamber and that is GOOD. The thing is that it doesn't bother me to hear people say they think homosexuality is a sin. That's fine. I understand the theology and the philosophy that gets you there. It does bother me - and this is where the word homophobia starts to get used - when it starts to get down to things like declaring homosexuality to be mental illness, using phrases like freak show. I have a hard time with people who use phrases like "homosexual agenda" and lobby for a ban on gay marriage because OMG the downfall of society - when it feels personal at other people more than it is a personal conviction for someone else. That's where it becomes a problem. It's hard to separate the political and the personal on things like this, but it's easy to respect a person who has a conviction you disagree with but treats others kindly and with respect. It's not hard to parse out which is which. Some perfectly reasonable and thoughtful folks with a different conviction get caught up in the backlash and end up being lumped in with the real homophobes sometimes and that's not okay either. Differences of opinion are good for our society but I also see no real obligation to try to make actual homophobes feel okay about their homophobia by not pointing it out. A lot of us sat down and shut up for a lot of years and just sort of accepted whatever people wanted to say about us and I can't exactly support that approach either.
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Jun 29, 2016 20:52:24 GMT
Sort of like someone else and I can say almost the same thing and you smack me down or how you slapped me on this thread when I hadn't even said a word to you here? I admit I respond differently to Rainbow than I do to other people - if a newbie posted the same threads as Rainbow in the past month, my responses would be very different than my responses on Rainbow's current threads. The point being that people respond to posters differently based on their history with them. It is human nature. You and I respond differently to each other than we do to other posters. To expect everyone to treat each other exactly the same way, regardless of history, is a perhaps unreachable and/or unrealistic goal. I certainly don't expect it from others, and the reality is evidenced on this thread, as people have been supportive of me and I've also been called "fucked up" and "hateful." Same posts from me and very different responses based on my history with people. That is the nature of relationships that have existed over time. Elaine, there's a huge difference between respectfully disagreeing and calling people stupid, idiots, liars and being aggressively hostile to them as you do and are to those you disagree with. Thank you for proving my point exactly. If anyone else wrote this post, you would have read and responded civilly. Instead, due to your history with me you didn't read it closely enough to understand what I was saying and slammed back with something that has absolutely nothing to do with what I said. Since you do it all the time with me- All the time - I have no idea why you are going on and on about people doing it with Rainbow as if it is behavior you don't engage in yourself. You do. Just change the name of the person being responded to.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 13, 2024 12:23:18 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2016 20:59:42 GMT
But I would say they were committing a sin. And who exactly would you say this to? Because unless they asked for your input on their sexuality, it's beyond assholian to go all judgey on them. YOU may want people to point out your "sins," and "lovingly" guide you back to whatever it is you want to be guided back to, but what you need to at least try and understand is that there is a huge wide world out there who doesn't believe the same things you do, and that's ok. They don't have to, and you shouldn't try to constantly preach your religious beliefs at others.
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Jun 29, 2016 21:00:09 GMT
This! The difference in the two posts aforementioned was the two different posters. Years of history lead many to respond to people (even if the subject is the same) very differently. That's where the argument that it's all on her, falls apart. If it's the same topic as the other Pea and Rainbow has said nothing offensive, but you (general you) choose to make personal attacks on her based on her history and not what she's actually posted, that's a choice you (general you) have made. Not Rainbow. Rainbow is not the one at fault there. So, the fact that you were just aggressive and hostile to me with absolutely no provocation is all on you and not on me? LOL!!!! Considering the witch you've been to me on this thread, second only to Lauren, I've been nice and civil to you. I'll get an apology when? You are making something complex - human relationships - way too simple. It is a relationship. It isn't one person or the other. Both parties play a part in any interaction. Otherwise, you have been a flaming nasty person without provocation on this thread. Everyone else reading the thread understands the back context, including myself.
|
|
|
Post by ktdoesntscrap on Jun 29, 2016 21:01:14 GMT
I don't think it is ever a compliment to call someone a homophobe. And I don't recall any instances where you were called a homophobe so I won't comment on that. (I am not saying it didn't happen I just don't remember any) Many people think a lot of things that other people do are sins. Pre-marital sex.. of any type comes to mind. Imagine today if we called out everyone who had pre-marital sex, if we called them Fornicators, or Sluts or Whores, based solely on the fact that they had premarital sex. If we publicly called them out, and tried to legislate against it. I would hope that people would be called out for doing that. Religion is no excuse to judge or put your values on others. That is between them and God. It has for a long time been okay, to call out, to humiliate, to judge people who choose to love someone of the same sex. If you want to judge them, that is your choice but when you decide to publicly judge or condemn them, call them sinners you should expect that people might call you out on your behavior. So maybe you aren't a homophobe, but based on what you wrote it does sound like you are taking God's place in judgement of people, branding them as sinners. I think it is unrealistic to expect no one to comment on that. I would never call anyone engaged in premarital sex a slut or whore. But I would say they were committing a sin. The specific situation I addressed was about homosexuality because that's what the post I was quoting referred back to. I didn't arbitrarily chose to focus on that subject. Identifying sinful behavior is not a judgement. James 5:20 says "Whoever turns a sinner from the error of their way will save them from death and cover over a multitude of sins." That's part of the reason I am not a fan of facebook shaming, shaming from the pulpit etc. The purpose in doing that is not usually done out of love. It's usually one of self righteousness and finger pointing. I have things in my life I have overcome and I do pray that should I find myself heading back into those behaviors my family/friends will activity turn me away from that sin. I don't want them to sit at home and wipe their hands of me and say "not my place to judge her" because it's not judging me to lovingly guide me. SaveWhen YOU (the General you, not the specific you) Call anyone a Sinner you are passing judgement on them. You (again the general you) do not get to decide who is a sinner and who is not. If you are actively calling out sinners on a message board you are publicly judging others. End of story.
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Jun 29, 2016 21:03:30 GMT
Here's my thing. I think the government is not my Church and I have no issues with the government allowing same sex marriages. I have never called someone who identifies as a homosexual a name. I do think it's a sin though, and that's a church issue. I have been called a homophobe on this board. A phobia is an irrational fear of something. I have no fears of folks in same sex relationships, I do not think the world is gonna cave in when the government gives these couples the same rights as a male/female couple. I don't stop watching my favorite shows when characters "come out". Yet because I think it's a sin I have been called a homophobe by folks on 2peas and my opinions dismissed as such. Back 25 years ago when I worked as an RN in Canada I held the hand of many young men as they died of AIDS related complications. Whose families and partners abandoned them. Yet I am the homophobe according to some. The word 'homophobe' is just as dismissive as "freaks" etc. It's said in an derogatory way for the most part. SaveI don't personally find a view that homosexuality is a sin to be homophobia. If I've expressed it that way, then this is my retraction. (I know you were not speaking to me, I'm just speaking in general.) The world I live in - I am a liberal, queer, Christian woman, in a heterosexual marriage, so some of my categories don't entirely fit - and most of my friends are more conservative, mostly evangelical types although I do have that subset of lefty friends who are pretty awesome too. But that means I live in this in between world. I actually like it that way. I don't live in an echo chamber and that is GOOD. The thing is that it doesn't bother me to hear people say they think homosexuality is a sin. That's fine. I understand the theology and the philosophy that gets you there. It does bother me - and this is where the word homophobia starts to get used - when it starts to get down to things like declaring homosexuality to be mental illness, using phrases like freak show. I have a hard time with people who use phrases like "homosexual agenda" and lobby for a ban on gay marriage because OMG the downfall of society - when it feels personal at other people more than it is a personal conviction for someone else. That's where it becomes a problem. It's hard to separate the political and the personal on things like this, but it's easy to respect a person who has a conviction you disagree with but treats others kindly and with respect. It's not hard to parse out which is which. Some perfectly reasonable and thoughtful folks with a different conviction get caught up in the backlash and end up being lumped in with the real homophobes sometimes and that's not okay either. Differences of opinion are good for our society but I also see no real obligation to try to make actual homophobes feel okay about their homophobia by not pointing it out. A lot of us sat down and shut up for a lot of years and just sort of accepted whatever people wanted to say about us and I can't exactly support that approach either.
|
|
|
Post by Sam on Jun 29, 2016 21:16:14 GMT
There was a point at which I honestly thought I'd seen it all on 2Peas/refugees.
I was wrong.
This is beyond the time at which you decide to change a word because you can - it's about when you shut down a cyclical pattern of abuse toward someone who may or may not see it.
Generally, I'm an each to their own kind of person and agree with those who are inflammatory dealing with their own shit, but there seem to be two discussions going on here...and one of them I am not a fan of.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 13, 2024 12:23:18 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2016 21:17:04 GMT
That's where the argument that it's all on her, falls apart. If it's the same topic as the other Pea and Rainbow has said nothing offensive, but you (general you) choose to make personal attacks on her based on her history and not what she's actually posted, that's a choice you (general you) have made. Not Rainbow. Rainbow is not the one at fault there. So, the fact that you were just aggressive and hostile to me with absolutely no provocation is all on you and not on me? LOL!!!! Considering the witch you've been to me on this thread, second only to Lauren, I've been nice and civil to you. I'll get an apology when? You are making something complex - human relationships - way too simple. It is a relationship. It isn't one person or the other. Both parties play a part in any interaction. Otherwise, you have been a flaming nasty person without provocation on this thread. Everyone else reading the thread understands the back context, including myself. I have been civil to you. It's not flaming nasty to notice how flaming nasty YOU are to people you don't agree with. That's nothing more than you attempting to turn around and blame me for noticing that you're flaming nasty. It's absurd.
|
|
inkedup
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,837
Jun 26, 2014 5:00:26 GMT
|
Post by inkedup on Jun 29, 2016 21:22:43 GMT
I find the hand-slapping curious. Let's call a spade a spade: this thread was created to hand-slap people for engaging Rainbow. I am seeing a lot of advice along the lines of, "if you don't like Rainbow, just ignore her." So why can't you (general you who agree with the OP) just ignore the people who respond to Rainbow? Doesn't it go both ways?
I think we are all adults here, and most of us act like adults most of the time. I don't like being told how or what I should or should not respond to on a public message board.
We should all take the sage advice to ignore posts and posters we are bothered by.
I rarely engage with Rainbow, but we did have some back and forth on her "when will this end" thread. I find it insulting that anyone would expect me to justify why I chose to respond to her.
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Jun 29, 2016 21:46:20 GMT
So, the fact that you were just aggressive and hostile to me with absolutely no provocation is all on you and not on me? LOL!!!! Considering the witch you've been to me on this thread, second only to Lauren, I've been nice and civil to you. I'll get an apology when? You are making something complex - human relationships - way too simple. It is a relationship. It isn't one person or the other. Both parties play a part in any interaction. Otherwise, you have been a flaming nasty person without provocation on this thread. Everyone else reading the thread understands the back context, including myself. I have been civil to you. It's not flaming nasty to notice how flaming nasty YOU are to people you don't agree with. That's nothing more than you attempting to turn around and blame me for noticing that you're flaming nasty. It's absurd. I was actually trying to have a discussion with you, Gia. About the impact the history a poster here on 2Peas has made for herself - be it Rainbow, me, or you- has on how other people respond to her posts. You are being as civil to me as most people that you are complaining about are to Rainbow. Have your responses to me been to try and discuss, or have they been to slap me down and cut off conversation? If your posts to me on this thread are what you consider "civil" then I have always been civil with you. You engage in the exact behavior with me that you don't like others doing with Rainbow. And it is because of our history.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Jun 29, 2016 21:51:33 GMT
This! The difference in the two posts aforementioned was the two different posters. Years of history lead many to respond to people (even if the subject is the same) very differently. That's where the argument that it's all on her, falls apart. If it's the same topic as the other Pea and Rainbow has said nothing offensive, but you (general you) choose to make personal attacks on her based on her history and not what she's actually posted, that's a choice you (general you) have made. Not Rainbow. Rainbow is not the one at fault there. Solely your opinion. You don't get to decide for me or anyone else what I/someone else feels is offensive. You are more than welcome to believe that rainbow does not post threads to be offensive, controversial, off-putting, or insulting. I don't happen to feel that way on some of her threads, and I'm okay with that. Give it a rest already. You are exhausting with the aggressive posts--and yes---yours posts are aggressive. When I read your posts I picture you coming at me with a hammer to bash your point across. And yes, you do it most of the time. I don't agree with you for the majority of your defense of rainbow. I'm okay with that and it does not make me wrong.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Jun 29, 2016 21:52:04 GMT
If this is one of the threads that you referenced, this is a response to rainbow from a member. You'll see, that back then, others felt the same as what I posted about.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 13, 2024 12:23:18 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2016 22:08:06 GMT
I have been civil to you. It's not flaming nasty to notice how flaming nasty YOU are to people you don't agree with. That's nothing more than you attempting to turn around and blame me for noticing that you're flaming nasty. It's absurd. I was actually trying to have a discussion with you, Gia. About the impact the history a poster here on 2Peas has made for herself - be it Rainbow, me, or you- has on how other people respond to her posts. You are being as civil to me as most people that you are complaining about are to Rainbow. Have your responses to me been to try and discuss, or have they been to slap me down and cut off conversation? If your posts to me on this thread are what you consider "civil" then I have always been civil with you. You engage in the exact behavior with me that you don't like others doing with Rainbow. And it is because of our history. It wasn't my intention to smack you down, I was making the point that there's a difference between disagreeing and attacking when you disagree. I completely and sincerely apologize and take full responsibility for responding to you in a way that came off as smacking you down and I see why it looks that way. I misunderstood your post that I responded to. It didn't look as if you were trying to have a discussion with me. I'm very sorry for responding in a negative way.
|
|